We've almost crowned another NCAA National Champion in basketball, and this year has been as crazy as any we've seen. But the madness just continues to make me long for a NCAA Football playoff. I know I touched on this earlier, but I decided to take the time and really expand the idea into a full fledged proposal. I truly believe that this plan could work if the parties involved took a step back and just tried to accommodate the fans rather than themselves. The proposal would require some key changes to the current format of college football, but nothing extreme.
1. Eliminate Conference Championship Games
Before anyone cries about this, remember that the first conference championship game of any kind wasn't played until 1992 in the SEC. There is no real tradition involved in the game, and it just serves to add an extra games worth of revenue for the conference. In very rare instances like last season you could see 2 undefeated teams square off, but it's not likely to happen on a consistent basis. Not to mention, wouldn't a national title game between Alabama and Florida (provided they made it) have been a better way to decide last season than in a conference championship game. Eliminating this game gives teams a bye week to rest before the playoffs begin, and prevents a team from losing a playoff spot by being beat by the same team twice as can happen. Tiebreakers for conference champions would fall into line with all the other conferences without championship games just like before.
2. Have Automatic Qualifiers
There are 11 conferences in Division I-A (and I will continue to refer to it as I-A because FBS gives credence to the bowl system that makes no fucking sense). Just like in basketball, each conference gets an automatic qualifier, so that there is no more worrying about lawsuits from Utah or Idaho. Everyone gets a shot. And just like in basketball, we'll probably never see a 16 upset a 1, but wouldn't it be fun if they did.
3. The Use for the BCS
Ah, now we can find a use for the BCS formula. At its best the BCS helps separate the best from the middle of the pack. With 11 teams automatically qualifying, that leaves 5 vacant spots in a 16 team tournament. So once the 11 teams are taken out, the next 5 highest ranked teams will be placed. The BCS can be used many ways. It can be a tool to help come to a decision, but not the ultimate decider, like the RPI in basketball, or it can be the final say in those 5 spots. Personally, I enjoy the selection committee because it allows for analysis that computers can't do. For example, and this pains me to say, but in 2007 LSU stomped VT in the 2nd game of the season. It was an ugly display for the Hokies, and a great one for LSU. By the end of the season, both teams finished 10-2. VT had lost to LSU by 41, and to BC by 4 in the rain, and later avenged the loss in the ACC Championship Game. LSU lost to Kentucky and Arkansas in OT. While not top flight teams, they didn't get blown out of the water in either game. However, at the end of the season, the computers had VT as the number 1 ranked team. Doesn't make a lot of sense. So the human factor in selecting the final 5 teams is best so that something like that could be avoided if it came down to a final spot.
4. The Seeding
Again, a great way to utilize the tool that is the BCS and selection committee. Seed the AQs that don't rank in the top 12 first and put them 13-16. Next seed the conference winners that are in top 12, which is likely 5-8 of them depending on the season based on whatever criteria wanted. Most likely it would again be a combo of BCS and human judgment. Finally place the at-large teams in the holes that are left. Now this isn't science, so for a year like last, the top 3 seeds would have been in some order Alabama, Florida, and Texas, so that wouldn't change. Having an overall idea going in is critical to getting it right. Give the top 4 seeds preferential treatment when determining game locations for the first and 2nd rounds, but be sure not to give any team seeded 9-12 any chance at a home-field advantage over the 5-8 seeds. Basically, copy to region formats from basketball as closely as possible. (If you've noticed a recurring theme, the NCAA does tournaments for every sport it possibly can, so it should be great at running one, and they do a great job in their most highly followed one, even if CBS screws it up. So take the lead from that and build upon it) Make sure that teams from the same conference wouldn't be able to play until the Final Four. One adjustment to the basketball formula would be reseeding after rounds. Since games are played a week apart, the ability to reseed like in hockey is there. I'll give an example later of how it would work.
5. Naming Rights
One thing that bowl advocates say that makes my skin crawl is the notion that they would lose the tradition of the bowls. Why? Couldn't the first round game between the 8 and 9 seed be known as the Cotton Bowl? Can't the 4-13 game be the Alamo Bowl? And these games would be better than the ones you already have. And to the bowls that aren't included in the playoff, get real. You're game of Toledo vs Marshall isn't going to lose and significance, and you can absolutely still play it, because it never has and never will have any affect on the National Championship. The top 4 bowls now: Sugar, Rose, Fiesta, and Orange will be the quarterfinal games. Followed by the Final Four of Football, and the National Championship Game. And if the opening round games want to rotate which bowls are used, even better.
6. The Weeks
Using this past season as an example: After eliminating the conference championship games the first week of December, the schedule would look like this:
November 27th - Last regular season game
December 5th - Bye Week
December 12th - First Round
December 19th - Second Round
December 26th - Final Four
January 2nd - NC Game
Kinda makes sense doesn't it.
7. The Example
So from the past season I will now demonstrate how awesome a college football playoff would have looked based on all the games except conference championships. And remember, this was a strange year, with 6 undefeated teams heading into conference championship week, and 5 emerging still undefeated. 2 of those teams were not from the big 6 conferences, and moved their seeds up significantly and moved the at-large bids down.
The Seeds:
1. Florida (SEC champ)
2. Alabama (SEC at-large)
3. Texas (Big 12 champ)
4. TCU (Mount. West champ)
5. Cincy (Big East champ)
6. Boise St. (WAC champ)
7. Oregon (Pac 10 champ)
8. Ohio St. (Big 10 champ)
9. Georgia Tech (ACC champ)
10. Iowa (Big 10 at-large)
11. Penn St. (Big 10 at-large)
12. Virginia Tech (ACC at-large)
13. LSU (SEC at-large)
14. Central Michigan (MAC champ)
15. East Carolina (C-USA champ)
16. Troy (Sun Belt champ)
The Games:
1. Florida vs 16. Troy
2. Alabama vs 15. East Carolina
3. Texas vs 14. Central Michigan
4. TCU vs 13. LSU
5. Cincinnati vs 12. Virginia Tech
6. Boise St. vs 11. Penn St.
7. Oregon vs 10. Iowa
8. Ohio St. vs 9. Georgia Tech
If we assume higher seeds win...
1. Florida vs 8. Ohio St.
2. Alabama vs 7. Oregon
3. Texas vs 6. Boise St.
4. TCU vs 5. Cincinnati
Once more...
1. Florida vs 4. TCU
2. Alabama vs 3. Texas
Now tell me that wouldn't be a hell of a tournament. As for the reseeding, we'll use as an example VT upsetting Cincinnati in the first round of games.
1. Florida vs 12. VT
2. Alabama vs 8. Ohio St
3. Texas vs 7. Oregon
4. TCU vs 6. Boise St.
Very simply, apply the formula throughout the rounds to give the 1 seed the easiest path that they earned.
I'm curious if anyone can find a reason why this wouldn't work. Please feel free to leave a comment and tell me why.
Edit:
Forgot one thing.
8. The Notre Dame Corollary
I almost forgot one important rule that needs to be reluctantly included known as the Notre Dame Corollary. This is a symbolic amendment for any team in I-A that isn't a member of a conference, which is just Notre Dame, Army, and Navy. Since they have no conference to win, they do have the opportunity to participate in the playoff under certain conditions. They can get an at-large spot by finishing high enough and being selected by the committee. More importantly, if they finish at least 12th in the BCS they are guaranteed to be a part of tournament as the 12th AQ no matter if they would be one of the 5 at-large selections. So if more than 4 of the top 12 would be at large selections and Notre Dame, Army, or Navy finishes there, they would bump another team out. At least this will be there until Notre Dame joins the Big East or Big 10.
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Friday, March 26, 2010
Monday, March 22, 2010
Northern Iowa: The Best and Worst Thing to Happen to College Sports
So it occurred to me while watching the online gamecast of Northern Iowa upsetting Kansas that I was missing one of those monumental upsets that will be on highlight reels for years. When Ali Farokhmanesh took that 3 he put a dagger in the heart of Kansas, but the ramifications of that shot may eventually affect more than just his teams fate. There are 2 major consequences that could come from not just the UNI win, but the all the other upsets this year.
The first is an expansion of the tournament to 96 (or 97) teams from the current field of 65. While I am for expansion, it is to a field of 68. Changing the play-in games from two automatic qualifiers who deserve to be in the field of 64 to making the last 4 at large spots play in games between bubble teams. At worst, keep the current format and just make the last at large spot a play-in game. However, seeing these at large teams seeded 11th or 12th win games will make other cry for their spot.
The second consequence is a little more far-reaching, but not totally insane. Games like this only make the BCS conferences more uneasy about a football playoff. In basketball you need to win 6 games in a row to become National Champion, but in most of the proposals for a college football playoff it's only 2 or 3. Now a 4, 8, or even 16 game tournament is definitely a better option for football due to its violent nature, but with the current system no non-BCS school has ever truly competed for a spot in the title game. For the Boise St. and Utah's of the world to ever have a shot they need to go undefeated and hope everyone else has at least 2 losses. With an 8 team playoff, both TCU and Boise St. would have played in the tournament, and would have had a legit chance to win. Imagine an 8 team playoff based on the BCS rankings. The first round would be Alabama vs Ohio St, Texas vs Oregon, Cincinnati vs Boise St, and TCU vs Florida. Everyone wins with that, but the conference commissioners get together, all they'll see is the potential to lose significant revenue by allowing the smaller schools in, which is a shame.
The first is an expansion of the tournament to 96 (or 97) teams from the current field of 65. While I am for expansion, it is to a field of 68. Changing the play-in games from two automatic qualifiers who deserve to be in the field of 64 to making the last 4 at large spots play in games between bubble teams. At worst, keep the current format and just make the last at large spot a play-in game. However, seeing these at large teams seeded 11th or 12th win games will make other cry for their spot.
The second consequence is a little more far-reaching, but not totally insane. Games like this only make the BCS conferences more uneasy about a football playoff. In basketball you need to win 6 games in a row to become National Champion, but in most of the proposals for a college football playoff it's only 2 or 3. Now a 4, 8, or even 16 game tournament is definitely a better option for football due to its violent nature, but with the current system no non-BCS school has ever truly competed for a spot in the title game. For the Boise St. and Utah's of the world to ever have a shot they need to go undefeated and hope everyone else has at least 2 losses. With an 8 team playoff, both TCU and Boise St. would have played in the tournament, and would have had a legit chance to win. Imagine an 8 team playoff based on the BCS rankings. The first round would be Alabama vs Ohio St, Texas vs Oregon, Cincinnati vs Boise St, and TCU vs Florida. Everyone wins with that, but the conference commissioners get together, all they'll see is the potential to lose significant revenue by allowing the smaller schools in, which is a shame.
Thursday, March 18, 2010
March Madness!
http://games.espn.go.com/tcmen/en/entry?entryID=1591840&print=true
I don't know how clear this is, but this is my tourney bracket from Yahoo! Feel free to debate, but don't pretend like you know it all, because you don't, and neither do I.
On a note, I found it interesting that 3 of the 4 teams I predicted in the Final Four initially are in the same region. So there goes that idea.
I don't know how clear this is, but this is my tourney bracket from Yahoo! Feel free to debate, but don't pretend like you know it all, because you don't, and neither do I.
On a note, I found it interesting that 3 of the 4 teams I predicted in the Final Four initially are in the same region. So there goes that idea.
Thursday, March 11, 2010
My Scouting Methods: Offense
So I have decided to put into writing how I scout players and what exactly I look for at each position. There are some very specific things I look for in some positions, and other times when more general things are important. Sometimes I will admit when I have a feeling about players (Darren McFadden) that has no basis in scouting but overwhelms me and must be accounted for. Other times there is very specific criticism (Jimmy Clausen against the rush) that makes highly touted players fall. Generally speaking the difference between my analysis and others won't be large, but can be somewhat different.
QB: I've always felt a QB that wins in college will generally be a winner in the NFL. This isn't always true, as my favorite QB of all time John Elway never went to a bowl game but won 2 Super Bowls, so team must be accounted for. In addition to the ability to win, the main attributes necessary for good QBs are accuracy and poise. Arm power is very overrated with scouts. While a strong arm will help, many teams will overvalue that. Throwing a 18-20 yard out route is great, but anticipation and accuracy to place the ball are more important than the laser to put it on a spot. The NFL is based on timing more than anything, and QBs know their strength and when to throw to put the ball in a spot, so accuracy means so much more.
RB: While speed and strength are vitals parts of a RBs arsenal, vision is the most important skill a back can have. Vision isn't taught or learned, but an ability someone is born with. Even when I played football I knew that even if I was fast or strong, I didn't have the same vision as others to find the right hole and explode through. Along with vision burst is necessary to be able to go through the hole and pick up yards. The big home run hitters very rarely can pick up tough yards, but guys with good burst and vision will be able to contribute on every down and be successful in the NFL.
WR: This position is probably the greatest discrepancy between combine numbers and actual NFL ability. So much focus is paid to 40 times and vertical jumps, when in reality the best receivers run crisp routes and are agile. Getting in and out of breaks is more important than straight line speed. If you're running a 9 route ok, but otherwise running fast in a line won't help you accomplish much because no one runs straight on the field. WRs in a diverse offensive scheme have a leg up due to their familiarity with the routes of an NFL team. Today's teams require drags and short slants as opposed to streaks and skinny posts, so WRs must adapt to those routes to be productive at the next level.
TE: The tight end position is tricky to evaluate because every team uses their tight ends a little differently. Some prefer TEs that can block and run the short to intermediate routes. While others want someone to stretch the field vertically up the seam and split out as a big WR. So I really struggle to decide what exactly I look for, but it really depends on the team's offense. Usually I try to find a mix of WR and OT, someone who can help set the edge on the run, chip on DEs and LBs in pass protection, and still run routes well. Speed is a little overrated at TE because they generally are space creators when running seam routes as opposed to actually trying to get over top the safeties. So knowledge of pass coverages helps as well.
OT: Playing offensive tackle well is extremely difficult, because even if you win the one on one battle 90% of the time, you probably just gave up 2-3 sacks or hurries. When watching tackles I like to see a quick first step, whether it be backwards or forwards. After that a good slide with balance when pass blocking is necessary to set the edge. Arm length is nice to create separation but not the ultimate physical attribute. Seeing a thick core helps when anchoring. This is the position where it seems most like a stock show as opposed to a human being.
OG/C: The interior OL positions are about the same. The require a little more bulk and a little less speed than the OT position. Pulling guards generally aren't out past the hashes anymore with more power O plays and less toss sweeps and student bodies. The decent interior linemen can rely on brute strength to survive, but the best will use hand placement when dealing with bigger DTs and blitzing LBs. Watch someone like Steve Hutchinson or Alan Faneca, they don't just bull through guys, they keep people out of their chest. Agility is always nice, but again a thick core is usually the most important part.
QB: I've always felt a QB that wins in college will generally be a winner in the NFL. This isn't always true, as my favorite QB of all time John Elway never went to a bowl game but won 2 Super Bowls, so team must be accounted for. In addition to the ability to win, the main attributes necessary for good QBs are accuracy and poise. Arm power is very overrated with scouts. While a strong arm will help, many teams will overvalue that. Throwing a 18-20 yard out route is great, but anticipation and accuracy to place the ball are more important than the laser to put it on a spot. The NFL is based on timing more than anything, and QBs know their strength and when to throw to put the ball in a spot, so accuracy means so much more.
RB: While speed and strength are vitals parts of a RBs arsenal, vision is the most important skill a back can have. Vision isn't taught or learned, but an ability someone is born with. Even when I played football I knew that even if I was fast or strong, I didn't have the same vision as others to find the right hole and explode through. Along with vision burst is necessary to be able to go through the hole and pick up yards. The big home run hitters very rarely can pick up tough yards, but guys with good burst and vision will be able to contribute on every down and be successful in the NFL.
WR: This position is probably the greatest discrepancy between combine numbers and actual NFL ability. So much focus is paid to 40 times and vertical jumps, when in reality the best receivers run crisp routes and are agile. Getting in and out of breaks is more important than straight line speed. If you're running a 9 route ok, but otherwise running fast in a line won't help you accomplish much because no one runs straight on the field. WRs in a diverse offensive scheme have a leg up due to their familiarity with the routes of an NFL team. Today's teams require drags and short slants as opposed to streaks and skinny posts, so WRs must adapt to those routes to be productive at the next level.
TE: The tight end position is tricky to evaluate because every team uses their tight ends a little differently. Some prefer TEs that can block and run the short to intermediate routes. While others want someone to stretch the field vertically up the seam and split out as a big WR. So I really struggle to decide what exactly I look for, but it really depends on the team's offense. Usually I try to find a mix of WR and OT, someone who can help set the edge on the run, chip on DEs and LBs in pass protection, and still run routes well. Speed is a little overrated at TE because they generally are space creators when running seam routes as opposed to actually trying to get over top the safeties. So knowledge of pass coverages helps as well.
OT: Playing offensive tackle well is extremely difficult, because even if you win the one on one battle 90% of the time, you probably just gave up 2-3 sacks or hurries. When watching tackles I like to see a quick first step, whether it be backwards or forwards. After that a good slide with balance when pass blocking is necessary to set the edge. Arm length is nice to create separation but not the ultimate physical attribute. Seeing a thick core helps when anchoring. This is the position where it seems most like a stock show as opposed to a human being.
OG/C: The interior OL positions are about the same. The require a little more bulk and a little less speed than the OT position. Pulling guards generally aren't out past the hashes anymore with more power O plays and less toss sweeps and student bodies. The decent interior linemen can rely on brute strength to survive, but the best will use hand placement when dealing with bigger DTs and blitzing LBs. Watch someone like Steve Hutchinson or Alan Faneca, they don't just bull through guys, they keep people out of their chest. Agility is always nice, but again a thick core is usually the most important part.
Monday, March 8, 2010
New Big Board
New Additions to the Big Board:
1. Sean Weatherspoon, OLB, Missouri
He was a guy who was right on the edge last time. He really made an impression at the combine, and not just from the white, full body Under Armour. Weatherspoon proved he has all the measurements necessary and played well at the Senior Bowl. He will be a good pick in the last quarter of the first round or any time after that.
2. Ryan Matthews, RB, Fresno St
Probably the only guy who really jumped up due to the combine solely for me. I didn't expect a 4.41 out of him. He has talent, but I worry about the level of competition he's played against. That's why that 4.41 really means a lot. It shows he isn't just dominating bad competition, but validates his NFL readiness. He should go late first/early second now.
3. Jason Pierre-Paul, DE, South Florida
Can't deny the guy's athleticism after he had a solid combine. I'm still sketchy on him because I worry about the one year wonder syndrome. There has never been a worry about kind of measurements he would have, just about his playing. He really makes the leap here because of the downfall of Greg Hardy. I still don't think he's a top DE in the draft, but he's on the next level that can be coached up.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Combine Thoughts: Stock Up, Stock Down
So the NFL Scouting Combine is done for 2010, and coming away from Lucas Oil Stadium, there were some clear winners and clear losers. These are the top 5 guys who have improved their stock, and top 5 guys who saw their stock drop.
Stock Up:
1. Dorin Dickerson, TE, Pittsburgh
Kind of an obvious pick here after an absolutely dominating performance in the 40 yard dash and vertical jump. He ran a 4.40 and jumped 43.5 inches and dominated the competition at TE. The only downside was that he measured in at 6'1", small for an ideal NFL TE, but probably ok for H-back. While I think he'll probably go in the 2nd round now, he still doesn't do anything for me as a player. His numbers may say Vernon Davis, but his production in college doesn't.
2. Devin McCourty, CB, Rutgers
Another guy who ran well in the 40, but I was more impressed with McCourty during his backpedal in the drills. He didn't look great when opening up his hips, and didn't really play the ball as well as I would like to see, but he did look fluid in short bursts. Perhaps he isn't suited for press coverage, but his ability to drive shows me he could play off a bit and really help.
3. Bruce Campbell, OT, Maryland
While he was expected to shine in Indy, he went above and beyond. His sporadic play is still the greatest concern, but Campbell is a guy who truly could be coached into greatness with the right team. He probably solidified a first round pick with his performance here.
4. Sean Weatherspoon, OLB, Missouri
Weatherspoon had slowly been creeping up big boards and mock drafts, and really proved why this past week. He looked fluid, fast, and strong. He is the top OLB prospect in this years draft, and may find himself in the late teens of the first round for a team with an OLB need. The nice thing is that his tape reflects his position, and he really played well at the Senior Bowl against some tough competition.
5. Jason Worilds, DE/OLB, Virginia Tech
Worilds is one of my favorites this year, and his combine really helped him a lot. He ran fast and performed well enough to really set himself up as a 3-4 OLB in the draft. His shoulder will always be something teams will be aware of, and will cause him to drop on draft day. However, he proved that athletically he is more than able to make the transition in the NFL. His college productivity and willingness to play through pain should cement him in the 3rd-4th round range.
Honorable Mention:
Golden Tate
Russell Okung
Jimmy Graham
Ryan Matthews
Dennis Pitta
Stock Down:
1. Dan LeFevour, QB, Central Michigan
LeFevour missed a chance to really put himself at the top of the 2nd round by deciding to only throw at bags and wait for his pro day. All the teams have representatives in Indy, and after a strong Senior Bowl week of practice he had the momentum in his favor. Now he has to hope teams will travel to Michigan to see him work out at his Pro Day (UConn and NC State both have pro days that day, so that may take away from his group). A bad performance there and he may slip out of the 2nd round all together.
2. Carlos Dunlap, DE, Florida
Dunlap was projected as a 3-4 DE in the NFL with great upside due to his speed, strength, and size. Well, the speed is there, but the strength and size were a bit lacking. Dunlap weighed in at 272, a full 18 lbs lighter than he was listed at Florida. He wasn't a top performer in the bench press, but was in the 40 yard dash. This may mean a transition from 3-4 end to 4-3 end or even 3-4 OLB, however that would be a brand new position unlike what he played in college. He becomes a risk now in the first round, and may have dropped himself out.
3. Navorro Bowman, OLB, Penn State
Bowman looked sloppy in his drills, falling down once and showing poor footwork. Bowman was projected high despite some problems because of his athletic ability, but that really didn't show through. He did well in the bench and some cone drills, but was slow in the 40, had a poor vertical jump, and was generally underwhelming. He had character issues before the season, and with this performance may have dropped out of the first round.
4. Joe Haden, CB, Florida
Haden ran a surprisingly slow 40 yard dash and didn't really do great in any drills. He still shows great skill on tape, but may drop a bit by teams concerned with his ability to keep up with the faster WRs in the league. If Haden can do a little better at his pro day he may be able to reverse the damage, but it seems likely that he will see his stock drop.
5. Myron Rolle, S, Florida State
I like Rolle a lot because he's a Rhodes Scholar and a high character guy. That doesn't mean he performed well at the combine. He was slow in the 40 and looked rather out of shape. He didn't have a great showing at the Senior Bowl either. He was out of position there, and really didn't turn well at the combine. Maybe once he gets back into football shape and plays more he will be productive, but he definitely hurt himself at the combine.
Stock Up:
1. Dorin Dickerson, TE, Pittsburgh
Kind of an obvious pick here after an absolutely dominating performance in the 40 yard dash and vertical jump. He ran a 4.40 and jumped 43.5 inches and dominated the competition at TE. The only downside was that he measured in at 6'1", small for an ideal NFL TE, but probably ok for H-back. While I think he'll probably go in the 2nd round now, he still doesn't do anything for me as a player. His numbers may say Vernon Davis, but his production in college doesn't.
2. Devin McCourty, CB, Rutgers
Another guy who ran well in the 40, but I was more impressed with McCourty during his backpedal in the drills. He didn't look great when opening up his hips, and didn't really play the ball as well as I would like to see, but he did look fluid in short bursts. Perhaps he isn't suited for press coverage, but his ability to drive shows me he could play off a bit and really help.
3. Bruce Campbell, OT, Maryland
While he was expected to shine in Indy, he went above and beyond. His sporadic play is still the greatest concern, but Campbell is a guy who truly could be coached into greatness with the right team. He probably solidified a first round pick with his performance here.
4. Sean Weatherspoon, OLB, Missouri
Weatherspoon had slowly been creeping up big boards and mock drafts, and really proved why this past week. He looked fluid, fast, and strong. He is the top OLB prospect in this years draft, and may find himself in the late teens of the first round for a team with an OLB need. The nice thing is that his tape reflects his position, and he really played well at the Senior Bowl against some tough competition.
5. Jason Worilds, DE/OLB, Virginia Tech
Worilds is one of my favorites this year, and his combine really helped him a lot. He ran fast and performed well enough to really set himself up as a 3-4 OLB in the draft. His shoulder will always be something teams will be aware of, and will cause him to drop on draft day. However, he proved that athletically he is more than able to make the transition in the NFL. His college productivity and willingness to play through pain should cement him in the 3rd-4th round range.
Honorable Mention:
Golden Tate
Russell Okung
Jimmy Graham
Ryan Matthews
Dennis Pitta
Stock Down:
1. Dan LeFevour, QB, Central Michigan
LeFevour missed a chance to really put himself at the top of the 2nd round by deciding to only throw at bags and wait for his pro day. All the teams have representatives in Indy, and after a strong Senior Bowl week of practice he had the momentum in his favor. Now he has to hope teams will travel to Michigan to see him work out at his Pro Day (UConn and NC State both have pro days that day, so that may take away from his group). A bad performance there and he may slip out of the 2nd round all together.
2. Carlos Dunlap, DE, Florida
Dunlap was projected as a 3-4 DE in the NFL with great upside due to his speed, strength, and size. Well, the speed is there, but the strength and size were a bit lacking. Dunlap weighed in at 272, a full 18 lbs lighter than he was listed at Florida. He wasn't a top performer in the bench press, but was in the 40 yard dash. This may mean a transition from 3-4 end to 4-3 end or even 3-4 OLB, however that would be a brand new position unlike what he played in college. He becomes a risk now in the first round, and may have dropped himself out.
3. Navorro Bowman, OLB, Penn State
Bowman looked sloppy in his drills, falling down once and showing poor footwork. Bowman was projected high despite some problems because of his athletic ability, but that really didn't show through. He did well in the bench and some cone drills, but was slow in the 40, had a poor vertical jump, and was generally underwhelming. He had character issues before the season, and with this performance may have dropped out of the first round.
4. Joe Haden, CB, Florida
Haden ran a surprisingly slow 40 yard dash and didn't really do great in any drills. He still shows great skill on tape, but may drop a bit by teams concerned with his ability to keep up with the faster WRs in the league. If Haden can do a little better at his pro day he may be able to reverse the damage, but it seems likely that he will see his stock drop.
5. Myron Rolle, S, Florida State
I like Rolle a lot because he's a Rhodes Scholar and a high character guy. That doesn't mean he performed well at the combine. He was slow in the 40 and looked rather out of shape. He didn't have a great showing at the Senior Bowl either. He was out of position there, and really didn't turn well at the combine. Maybe once he gets back into football shape and plays more he will be productive, but he definitely hurt himself at the combine.
Monday, March 1, 2010
Middle First Round....Take a LB
With doing my research on skill position offensive players, I noticed one thing about the players picked in that area. The linebackers picked between 11 to 21 seem to have an extremely high rate of success. Teams seem to undervalue quality linebackers, and solidifying the defense with great LB can make a world of difference. Think about Ray Lewis and the impact he has on the Ravens D. Even when he's not in the play, he acts as a de facto QB, making sure his teammates are in position. Many of the guys taken since 2000 at the LB position are difference makers that should be top 10 picks but aren't because of some belief that a quality LB doesn't deserve the same money as a WR or DE. Sorry, I disagree, and this list might prove my point. These are all the LBs taken between 11 and 21 since 2000.
Julian Peterson
Dan Morgan
D.J. Williams
Jonathan Vilma
David Pollack
Derrick Johnson
Thomas Davis
Shawne Merriman
Demarcus Ware
Bobby Carpenter
Chad Greenway
Lawrence Timmons
Patrick Willis
Larry English
Brian Cushing
Brian Orakpo
Forgetting about the popularity contest that is the Pro Bowl, this group of players has made 13 1st or 2nd team All-Pro teams. That is an impressive number. Taking out Pollack, who played sparingly during his injury filled career, and the 3 rookies, 12 players have 12 All-Pro teams (Cushing made 2nd team this year, impressive already). So maybe come draft day, Rolando McClain, Brandon Spikes, and Sean Weatherspoon should be thankful if they get drafted in the middle of the first round.
Julian Peterson
Dan Morgan
D.J. Williams
Jonathan Vilma
David Pollack
Derrick Johnson
Thomas Davis
Shawne Merriman
Demarcus Ware
Bobby Carpenter
Chad Greenway
Lawrence Timmons
Patrick Willis
Larry English
Brian Cushing
Brian Orakpo
Forgetting about the popularity contest that is the Pro Bowl, this group of players has made 13 1st or 2nd team All-Pro teams. That is an impressive number. Taking out Pollack, who played sparingly during his injury filled career, and the 3 rookies, 12 players have 12 All-Pro teams (Cushing made 2nd team this year, impressive already). So maybe come draft day, Rolando McClain, Brandon Spikes, and Sean Weatherspoon should be thankful if they get drafted in the middle of the first round.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
