With the draft just a day away, it is finally time to reveal the scouting reports of the top offensive players in the country and we will start with the TE;s
| 3 | 28 | Keller | Dustin | Purdue U | TE | 6020v | 242v | 4.59v | G | |
| Very impressive athlete who only lacks size to become a top pro TE or H. Runs extremely well, has excellent body control, and hands to catch the ball on or off his person. A legitimate up the seam threat who flashed run instincts to go along with the strength to break secured tackles. Adequate blocker who initially gets into his block, but didn’t finish with any consistentcy. Will need to improve his overall functional play strength. Late 1 top of 2nd consideration.
|
||||||||||
| 1 | 83 | Davis | Fred | USC | TE | 6030v | 255v | 4.73v | G | |
| Outstanding prep wide receiver (10.8 100M). Is still in many ways a work in progres who has not come near his potential as a player.Good initial quickness on his get off. Got in and out of a break on his under routes while posing an up the seam threat. Improving as a blocker although needs to finish with far more consistentcy. Not there yet, but in time will give a club the best two way potential in this year’s draft. Possible 1st top of 2nd consideration. | ||||||||||
| 2 | 13 | Bennett | Martellus | Texas A&M | TE | 6061v | 259v | 4.69v | I | |
| Has a great body and potentially is one talented football player. A physical player at the point of attack with very good body control particularly for a big man. Is much improved as a receiver. Had some concentration drops, but I like catching radius and his ability to win in traffic. Far more physical then I had originally expected. Can drop his weight and get in and out of a route effectively. Is young and said to be a “me guy” who will need to mature. Round 1 consideration. | ||||||||||
| 4 | 89 | Carlson | John | Notre Dame | TE | 6051v | 251v | 4.89v | F | |
| Big, smart, athletic, experienced, instinctive football player. Felt he caught the ball well in the under zones although in not a true seam threat (lacks foot speed). Not really nifty after the catch, but did show some body strength, got north-south and worked to finish. Inline was an adequate blocker who came off flat backed, hit on the rise and stayed with his blocks. A solid back up early who could in time develop into a solid regular. Round # 3 draft consideration | ||||||||||
| 5 | 82 | Stevens | Craig | California U | TE | 6032v | 254v | 4.63v | I | |
| An impressive ball player. Has a good frame to add bulk and strength, runs well and is very solid athlete. I felt he had wide receiver type hands and the quickness and speed to threaten up the seam. As a blocker, wasn’t either punishing or a big finisher, but was smart and efficient. Positions after contact (brings his feet around) and stays with blocks. Very good feet and balance. Solid H back prospect who should factor in the mid rounds (4th to 5th). | ||||||||||
| 6 | 80 | Cottam | Brad | Tennessee U | TE | 6074v | 270v | 4.74v | I | |
| Injured for most of the 2007 season. Is extremely tall with long limbs and big hands. The best area of his game was without question in the passing game. Has very good hands, a wide receiving radius and was extremely difficut to stop in the under zones. Used his body to shield defenders from the football. Will have a difficult time functioning as a blocker at the pro level (high center of gravity – can’t leverage the point). Second day draft consideration | ||||||||||
| 7 | 82 | Rucker | Martin | Missouri U | TE | 6047v | 251v | 4.71v | I | |
| A late bloomer who is a one dimentional TE prospect. Catches well and was a strong runner after the catch. Money in the bank in the under zones. Lacks the true speed to pose an up the seam threat. Is neither as quick or fast as I originally expected and lacks the essential core strength necessary to contribute at the point of attack. Played too high and got little or no movement. Needs to fit into your offensive scheme. Rd 3-4 draft consideration. | ||||||||||
| 8 | 80 | Freeman-Davis | Kellen | Michigan St | TE | 6064v | 262v | 4.64v | E | |
| Has size and flashed catching skills. Has the ability to run down the seam, but I felt he was stiff and didn’t get in and out of his under routes especially well. Can’t and didn’t appear to have much “want to” blocking inline. Dropped too many balls in critical situations. A classic underachiever (should dominate in all aspects, but didn’t). High maintenance. Mid round consideration. Draft consideration rounds 4 – 5. | ||||||||||
| 9 | 18 | Tamme | Jacob | Kentucky U | TE | 6034v | 236v | 4.59v | G | |
| In the right system could become a very effective player. Can run (straight line), catch and advance the ball. Good to find and settle in the zone hole. Outstanding ball skills. Smart player with great intangibles. Poses a vertical up the seam threat. Disappointing in traffic. Ineffective contributor within the running game (marginal blocker). Too stiff to play WR and not stout enough for TE. Draft consideration 4 – 5. | ||||||||||
| 10 | 82 | Barnidge | Gary | Louisville U | TE | 6055v | 243v | 4.65v | J | |
| Has physical limitations; isn’t big by today’s standards, was stiff & mechanical in his movement and doesn’t have good play strength, but none the less is a very under rated ball player. Is smart, showed good route awareness, was tough, competitive, caught and advanced the ball up the field after the catch is going to have to improve his block skills, but should fill the role of a steady back-up TE within the league. 4 – 5 draft consideration | ||||||||||
| 11 | 16 | Finley | Jermichael | Texas U | TE | 6042v | 243v | 4.85v | J | |
| Was injured for much of the 2007 season. Has rare size and a huge receiving radius and although realize he has a tremendous amount of playing potential, but I thought he lacked concentration and consistency. Tracks the ball extremely well. I particularly liked the way he adjusted to the deep ball. Very awkward getting into a lateral break (plants his heels). Still too many unknowns to consider this player in either of the first day | ||||||||||
| 12 | 19 | Finley | Joe Jon | Oklahoma U | TE | 6062v | 254v | 4.95v | F | |
| A former prep quarterback with good hands and intelligence. Was effective in the under zones, but was not what I would consider an up the seam threat. Along the line of scrimmage is a try hard guy, but doesn’t have the leg strength and power to either sustain and or finish (does work at it) If he matures physically, I see him as factoring as a second or third tight end and special teams contributor. Has 5th to 7th round draft potential. | ||||||||||
| 13 | 14 | Strong | Darrell | Pittsburgh U | TE | 6040v | 268v | 4.83v | I | |
| Has had some off the field and dedication issues. Prep quarterback and WR. Has excellent size for the position to go along with solid athletic skills, but has never been a fulltime regular at the position. Much improved in 2007 as a blocker and impressed me with his Hula Bowl receiving ability. In the passing game, I felt he needed room to be effective (didn’t see him win a contested battle for the football). See him as a solid back up at the professional level. Rounds 6-7. | ||||||||||
| 14 | 80 | Haynos | Joey | Maryland U | TE | 6075v | 266v | 4.92v | F | |
| Has a basketball background. Good athlete who caught the ball well in the under zones. Can reach and extend for the ball . Wasn’t flashy or insitinctive, but turned it up and advanced the ball. Not a power player (may well be too tall). Has a very high center of gravity which made it difficult for him to leverage people inline. Not a washout, but will have to play in the right system in order to have any successful. Mid second day consideration (6th to 7th). | ||||||||||
0 comments ↓
There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.
You must log in to post a comment.