Gus Ornstein's School of Sports » Notre Dame

Summer Football Camps

Gus — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 21:00:41 +0000

By Gus Ornstein

I went to a tiny high school in New York City known more for its academics than its athletics, yet I received over 50 scholarship offers to play division one football and ended up at Notre Dame before transferring to Michigan State. People ask me all the time how I got discovered and my answer is simple- I went to summer football camps. The summer after my junior year, I attended a couple of different football camps, I went to the University of Wesleyan, Princeton University and The University of Michigan. I chose Wesleyan and Princeton because I was not sure how good I was, yet I knew I was doing well in school and thought these could be great schools for me. As far as going to Michigan’s camp, I figured that I had nothing to lose and should take a shot and see what the rest of the competition was like. Michigan’s football camp ended up being the thing that put me on the map as far as recruiting goes. They had over 1500 kids at the camp and it seemed like half of them were QB’s. I ended up having a great camp and one afternoon they ran a mini combine by taking the top players at each position and putting them through some drills. I was fortunate enough to be chosen to participate in this and had the opportunity to show my skills not only to the University of Michigan Staff but to all of the other coaches from different university’s around the country. The key to going to football camp at a big school is the amount of coaches they hire to work the camp and that these coaches come from different colleges and universities from around the country and from all different levels of competition. Even if you are not destined to be a division one player, you can still be discovered by one of these other schools.

Lloyd Carr- University of Michigan

As the camp came to an end, I was approached by then offensive coordinator Cam Cameron who told me that Michigan head coach, Gary Moeller wanted to see me in his office. I was so thrilled and excited that the head coach of The University of Michigan actually wanted to speak with me before leaving the camp. I went straight to his office and sat there as he told me they were extremely interested in me as a prospect and would be following me through my senior season and would be in touch. I feel very strongly that had I not attended that camp, I would have never been recruited as heavily as I was.

Princeton Football

Will Proctor who played quarterback at the University of Clemson had a very similar situation coming out of a small school in Florida and I spoke to him about that experience.

Will Proctor- University of Clemson QB

Will Proctor Interview

Scouting the 2008 TE’s

Gus — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 13:32:20 +0000

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).

Scouting the 2008 Centers

Gus — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 14:47:24 +0000

No offensive line can be effective without a great center, and here the best ones that are going to be eligible for the draft on Saturday.

1	78	Lichtensteiger	Kory	Bowling Green	OC	6022v	298v	5.28v	G
	Four year regular. Very good player although not impressive to look at physically (short arms). Good balance and quick feet. Very tough and nasty. Very smart and aware (makes all front calls). Quick to the second level. Shows good knee bend and leverage on his blocks. Struggled with big people on pass protection, but never stopped working. A blue coller player, who plays the game with passion and heart. Has strong second day draft consideration.
2	76	Pollak	Mike	Arizona St	OC	6034v	301v	4.99v	I
	A good serviceable football player, but I didn’t think he was particularly strong or effective at the point of attack. but going to have some real problem with big people inside. Is smart, experienced took good angles and plays on his feet. On pass pro, looked around well, was a good knee bender and overall athletic skills. Not a nasty individual and is never going to be a big finisher, but has solid play skills and should become a steady swingman inside. Round 4 – 5
3	74	Justice	Steve	Wake Forest U	OC	6033v	290v	5.29v	G
	Has a pre existent condition which required his parents had to sign a waiver in order to play at Wake each season (no apparent effect in his play). Has athletic ability, experience and intelligence. Good athlete with toughness. Can reach effectively playside. Had problems with big people on his nose. Lacks core strength and rear power. Solid football player who could develop into a steady professional.
4	78	Sullivan	John	Notre Dame	OC	6034v	301v	5.39v	F
	Disappointed with his play in 2007. Is an experienced hand with intelligence, but was surprisingly not a natural knee bender (extensive wrestling background) and didn’t get consistent fits inline. On pass pro didn’t appear able to drop his base and make a stand vs a power rush. Had some very untimely gun snap errors in 07. Round 5 to 7 draft consideration.
5	70	Wallace	Cody	Texas A&M	OC	6042v	296v	5.31v	F
	Over achiever. Not a supple athlete, but is tough, experienced and durable. Had problems with people on his nose. Not strong at the point of attack. Just adequate contact balance. Tough, nasty individual. Journeyman player who has the potential to fill in at the OG spot. Problems with the bull rush. If he goes to a club that employs a zone blocking scheme (slide protection) could play a long time. Mid to late second day draft consideration (5 – 6).
6	71	Richard	Jameson	Buffalo U	OC	6046v	297v	5.12v	F
	A limited athlete, but was tough, strong, and very physical. Gets after people and showed better then expected upper body leverage. Good angles to 2nd level, but was inconsistent to sustain. Will also overplay or miss the target. On pass protection, showed adequate anchor when working against the bull rush. Is going to need some work, but was very pleased with his work throughout the season. Would give 6th to 7th round draft consideration.
7	69	Spanos	Matt	USC	OC	6053v	322v	5.39v	F
	Stepped into a starting role with an injury this past year and played far better then expected. Is both big and strong, but was not an explosive player. . Walls off effectively and worked well in tandem. Improved with each passing game. Not an especially good athlete but will fight you to the end. Played much of the season with a triceps injury which need to be repaired. Has an outside chance of being drafted, but is more likely a priority free agent within the league.
8	67	Miller	Drew	Florida U	OC	6046v	302v	5.30e	F
	Doesn’t play big. Lacks functional playing strength and finishing skills. Is smart and plays with savvy, but will have a particularly tough time blocking big people at the next level. On pass protection,I didn’t think he had near enough physical ability to handle a professional defender. Is smart, experienced and has lined up at both OG and the OC position, but lacks the necessary skills to play. Marginal free agent.
9	72	Bujnoch	Glen	Cincinnati U	OC	6046v	285v	5.24v	G
	Dad (Glen) played with the Bengal’s. Undersized player with limited play strength. Great kid with size potential, experience and good intangibles. I thought he played too rigid. Playing a tackle position, but did work at the center position in the spring and appears physically far better suited to project inside in the professional ranks. Will have get stronger and to do a far better job of keeping his pads down to play the OC position, but has a chance.

Scouting the 2008 Safeties

Gus — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 20:33:59 +0000

Tom Marino takes on the safeties of the 2008 NFL draft.

1	1	Phillips	Kenny	Miami U	DS	6022v	212v	4.51v	I
	Athletic big man who runs well in his pads. Comes down hill quickly and enters the fray with good control. Good angles on wide plays and hits with force. In coverage, keys the defense and made all of the back end adjustments. I liked his movement (pedal, turns and range), but just didn’t get into the throwing lanes or make many plays on the ball. Game appears to be all ahead of him. Top round consideration
2	38	Smith	Reggie	Oklahoma U	DS	6004v	199v	4.58v	I
	Showed smooth athletic movement, good feet & supple hips, but I didn’t see a sudden explosive movement or close to the ball. A proto-type cover two corner or safety. Tough enough, but far from a head hunter. Injured toe late and didn’t run at the Indy combine. Good zone awareness. Not as quick or fast as I had originally expected, but I liked his size, playing instincts, and ball skills. Return ability & teams play are a added plus. Draft consideration round 2 – 3.
3	10	Demps	Quintin	Texas-El Paso	DS	5117v	206v	4.40v	I
	Is a good looking athlete from a physical standpoint and made plays on the ball in flight. Reads the QB’s eyes & shoulders and moves to the football. Has excellent speed anticipation and playing range (speed to play half coverage). The major negative that I saw with this player was his total lack of interest and production within the running game (was neither physical or very tough). Has tools, but will need to become a more willing participant. Round 3 – 4
4	7	Morgan	DaJuan	No Carolina St	DS	6001v	203v	4.55v	I
	Has size & some playing savvy, but wasn’t a fast twitch athlete. Is stiff in his pedal & I would seriously question his ability to match up with a receiver in the slot. Double moves give him some serious problems (FSU). Best area’s of his game were his take on, tackling skills in the open field & his willingness to fill the lane. Coverage limitations concern me, but he can improve in this area & develop into a productive special team player & eventual starter within the league.
5	4	Decoud	Thomas	California U	DS	6013v	207v	4.56v	I
	Merton Hanks type player and body type. Showed a lot of playing range and impressive ball skills. Will fill the ally when called upon (not a big hitter), but was more effective in coverage. Has a chance to play out on a wing in nickel. I really liked his ball playing instincts and ability to sort things out. Solid back up, with a chance to factor in time. Good special teams potential. Has solid second day draft potential. Round 4 – 5.
6	16	Johnson	Marcellous	Arkansas St	DS	5117v	207v	4.44v	I
	A four year starter at the free safety position. Has good size, range, has the speed to stay on top of receiver in half coverage. I liked his zone cover skills (showed awareness, an understanding of routes progressions, and reacted well to the thrown ball (particularly in front of him). Not a big hitter, but gets people off their feet. Not flashy, but I liked his feel for the game.
10	47	Lynch	Corey	Appalachian St	DS	6003v	202v	4.56v	F
	Has excellent ball skills & instincts for the game. Very bright. Very physical tackler who will fill the lane. Has good playing range & anticipation. Experienced hand that keys the secondary. Limited only by his lack of top end speed, but ran well in pads. Very adept in zone coverage. Gets into the passing lanes & makes plays on the ball. Outstanding team’s potential (has blocked numerous kicks in his career). The type of individual you want on your football club.
11	9	Zbikowski	Tommy	Notre Dame	DS	5112v	211v	4.53v	I
	Has not played to near the level expected of him in 07. Dangerous returner who hit it up inside (showed a burst). Based on my exposure doesn’t have the cover skills to match up vs an inside receiver and surprisingly wasn’t a big factor in the running game (played like he was afraid to make a mistake). Has zone awareness and football smarts, but something appeared to be missing. Would question skills if I hadn’t seen him perform as an underclassman. Rd 5-6.
7	25	Wolfe	D.J.	Oklahoma U	DS	5111v	207v	4.65v	F
	Moved to defensive safety at the start of the season and appeared to get better with each passing week. Impressed my with his tackling skills and looked more comfortable on the inside. Was alert and showed playing instincts, but I was a tad disappointed with his ball skills. Covers ground and runs well in his pads. Feel this player could well surprise at the next level and become an eventual starter. Like his teams potential. Middle round consideration (4 – 5).
8	16	Steltz	Craig	LSU	DS	6013v	213v	4.64v	F
	1st year starter and team leader on the backend. Has very good size and playing awareness, particularly in zone coverage. Play the deep ball in the middle of the field particularly well (height & long arms make him a difficult person to throw over). Comes up under control & was an effective in the box run stopper. Questionable long speed and the necessary skills to match up in the slot. Back up early with good teams potential. Mid round consideration. (5 – 6).
9	22	Adams	Jamar	Michigan U	DS	6021v	212v	4.62v	F
	I liked the way this athlete’s size, know-how, toughness and the way he prepared (Senior Bowl week), but just didn’t appear to have the necessary speed to get off the hash in half coverage. Fills the ally with abandon and has the body type to win the battle at the point. Sorts things out quickly in quarters and moves to the ball, but made few plays on the ball. Has limitations (not an man cover guy)
12	19	Barrett	Josh	Arizona St	DS	6016v	223v	4.36v	E
	Has size, outstanding speed and looks awful pretty in a uniform, but just didn’t make plays. Wasn’t very physical in his play or tough (won’t tackle). Have to question his willingness to compete (won’t tackle) In coverage worked out of a tall deliberate pedal showing just adequate range and ball skills. Just don’t think he sees it or reacts quickly enough. Should be a dominant player, but something appears to be missing.
13	2	Castille	Simeon	Alabama U	DS	6003v	195v	4.73v	F
	Is a good college football player, but flat out lacks the speed, acceleration and fast twitch muscle fiber to realistically play out at the corner position in the NFL. Body type (lean narrow looking) probably make him better suited for the free safety position or a inside nickel guy. Good zone awareness but will have to play in a a cover 2 scheme. Not a Sammy Knight type (smash mouth player), but I liked his teams potential. and good instincts. Late rd consideration 5 – 6
14	21	Mundy	Ryan	West Virginia U	DS	6007v	208v	4.65e	F
	Senior transfer from the U of Michigan at FS. Is a very mature, smart and instinctive player. Makes all the back end calls and adjustemts..Reads the run quickly, comes up under control , and makes plays (not a head hunter, but more then adequate tackler. In zone, covered ground and showed good awareness and ball skills. Marginal man cover skills. Impressive in bowl victory vs Oklahoma. If medically sound, has a chance to factor. Round 6 – 7.
15	30	Lyles	Nate	Virginia U	DS	5105v	203v	4.54v	G
	A tough run support safety who played physical and smart. Somewhat of a tweener in the sense he lacks the size to play inside and doesn’t have the pure cover skills to play out at a corner position. Best suited to play corner in a cover two scheme and inside in nickel. Has a big upper but thin lower body. A good athlete who showed some explosiveness and a burst. Some medical concerns (neck). Late round draft or priority free agent consideration.
16	23	Barber	Dominique	Minnesota U	DS	6002v	210v	4.70v	F
	Tough guy with size, but wasn’t sudden in his movement, lacks long speed and did not show particularly good ball skills. Just adequate quickness and playing range. I really liked his physical toughs and competitiveness (playing character), but is in my opinion strictly a two down box safety. Will also give a club top special teams play, but is quite frankly a liability in coverage (man or zone). Has late second day (6th to 7th round). draft potential.
17	23	Abdullah	Husain	Washington St	DS	5117v	204v	4.69v	F
	A four year regular and playmaker who led WSU in both tackles and picks in 2007 (took 2 to the house). Brother plays with the Denver Broncos. Does a lot of things that contribute to winning football games, but does not run well. Is going to have match-up problems with people in the slot and has very questionable recovery skills. Physical tackler who will factor on special teams. Like his game, but has limitations. Late round consideration.
18	11	Keyes	Dennis	UCLA	DS	6005v	205v	4.68v	F
	Good athlete with good size, feet, body control and the ability to change direction. I liked his range and ability to makes plays on the ball. Anticipated well and gets himself into the throwing lanes. Was UCLA’s leading tackler in 07, but wasn’t a consistent wrap up tackler in my opinion (missed far too many in the open feet). My biggest concern was his lack of long speed. Has a lot of positive attributes and should factor as a back up at free safety. Late consideration.
19	14	Horton	Chris	UCLA	DS	6001v	212v	4.60v	F
	Team leader and the heart and soul of this football team. Is tough and was a physical wrap up tackler (downhill player). Top end speed, close, and ball skills were just adequate. Highly questionable cover skills (loses in transition – always trailing) particularly when covering people on the back end. Has the physical make up and the competitiveness you look for in a special teams player. Has late round draft potential if speed and quickness are satisfactory. Round 6 – 7.
20	5	Fields	Joseph	Syracuse U	DS	6002v	206v	4.60e	F
	A great kid with intelligence, size & solid athletic skills. Former option QB (starter as frosh) who has made steady progress over the past 2 seasons. Inexperienced (not quick to see things develop – inconsistent play entry & angles). Vs the pass, showed range but didn’t make a lot of plays on the ball. Should develop into a serviceable player, but is not there yet. Has every intangible you look for in a player. Possible late pick, but more likely a PFA
21	18	Gliatta	Vince	Youngstown St	DS	6004e	210e	4.65e	F
	Came out of nowhere to have a solid senior season. Option QB in high school who transferred from Penn State after his frosh season. Is a very tough kid, who moved around very well in space, but doesn’t appear to have long speed. Not natural or very fluid in coverage, but did show good reactions.and toughness. A physical down hill player who will face up a ball carrier (see Ohio St). Has gotten some club’s attension, but is more a free agent.
22	8	Grant	Michael	Arkansas U	DS	5102v	186v	4.41v	G
	Runs well and showed a true closing burst. Track star in high school. Is short in stature and just wasn’t very instinctive and lacks the hips to play out on a wing. Steady college player, but was far from the complete package. Would have to question just how quickly he sees things develop and reacts. Has inside match up potential, but needs to become more consistent as a as a tackler. Somebody might draft based on his speed, but is more likely a free agent.
23	27	Roach	David	TCU	DS	6003v	210v	4.56v	F
	Great looking player in his uniform. Runs well in a straight line and can cover ground, but little or no playing instincts nor was he a productive player. Vs the run, I never saw him stick his foot in the ground and fill the lane far (too many plays ended up at his feet). Vs the pass, again didn’t react quickly or show either ball skills or instincts. Somebody is going to draft late based on his physical characteristics but this is football and not the Mr. Universe competition.
24	3	Warrick	Nehemiah	Michigan St	DS	6007v	211v	4.56v	F
	A tough kid, who will light you up if he can get there. Is good looking physically, with toughs, and is a big hitter. Fills aggressively inside, but misses more then his share of tackles. Took inconsistent angles away and at times appeared out of control. Speed limits his man cover skills and wasn’t quick to see things develop in zone. See him as a special team’s player who could in time develop into a contributing back up. Late consideration or priority FA potential
25	26	Griffin	Marcus	Texas U	DS	5102v	201v	4.81v	G
	Not near as talented as his football playing brother. Is smart and has played well on special teams over his career, but his playing instincts were marginal and I felt he missed far too many tackles. Runs ok in his pads, but I didn’t see a closing burst. Don’t see this player as having starting potential, but looks like he may have the overall skills to roster (back up at both safety positions and special team’s contributor). Late round or priority free agent consideration.

Scouting the 2008 Defensive Tackle’s

Gus — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 19:49:59 +0000

This is a draft analysis of the top defensive tackles coming out for 2008. The information and scouting reports are all written by Tom Marino who has been a scout in the NFL for over 35 years. You can see the defensive tackle, their school, height/weight. 40 time and NFL grade. You then have their full scouting report followed by their projected draft status and NFL potential.

72	Dorsey	Glen	LSU	DT	6014v	297v	5.12v	G	1.100
A top prospect who converts quickness to power. Can split a double team, range to make plays and when he came and countered on his pass rush was virtually impossible to single block. Loved his intensity level , quickness, strength and know how. Strong at the point and showed good movement down the line. Took good angles away and has the speed and quicks to factor outside the tackle boxInjured for much of 07 season. A difference maker.
49	Ellis	Sedrick	USC	DT	6004v	299v	5.08v	G	1.140
Ellis has outstanding quickness, body control, range and balance. Plays with good leverage, has extremely quick strong hands and overall explosiveness. Can stack, but was more effective playing in the gap. Far better at nose then at a 3 technique. Has short arms and does not appear to have long speed. Very disruptive player in a limited area but is not second coming of Tommy Harris. A top 10 selection in this year’s player draft. Solid starter potential.
90	Balmer	Kentwan	No Carolina U	DT	6044v	308v	5.31v	F	1.201
One dimensional player. Is strong, plays on his feet and showed the ability to neutralize. A force playing the double team. As a pass rusher, did get inside push on his bull rush, but needs to keep pads down and develop better hand use. Played hard in every contest viewed. Tackle to tackle range only. showed good effort in pursuit. A two down player, but could become an every down player if he develops as a rusher. Late 1st or top of the 2nd selection
55	Harrison	Marcus	Arkansas U	DT	6026v	317v	5.07v	I	1.235
Very talented run stopper. Loved his pad level when meeting blocks and overall leverage. Stout at the point (can dominate). Could play both spots inside. Played the entire 07 season with a recently repaired ACL. Not what I would consider a top pass rusher (power moves only) but does get some inside push. Some off the field concerns will need to be addressed, but this is a very good football player who has not reached his full potential. Draft consideration 2 – 3
92	Moore	Dre	Maryland U	DT	6040v	305v	4.91v	I	1.350
Short area player who was a strong space eater on the inside. Didn’t make a a lot of plays, but restricted the running lanes inside and freed up the backers to make plays. Plays on his feet and did a good job stacking the double team. Has good but not exceptional quickness but was ineffective as a pass rusher (strictly a bull rusher who didn’t counter or colaspe the pocket. Round 3 potential, but could go sooner due to team needs and the lack of quality at the top
92	Pressley	DeMario	No Carolina St	DT	6031v	301v	5.13v	I	1.365
Had a disappointing 07 season and senior bowl effort Was injured for much of the season and did not play to near his skill level. Is a strong inside player who played with good pad level. Elbow injury (early) may well have effected his use of hands. Good ability to sort things out and move to the ball. As a pass rusher, came off the ball, but didn’t shed effectively on the move nor did he finish. Don’t think we have seen near his best. Round 3 – 4 consideration.
93	Guion	Letroy	Florida St	DT	6033v	303v	5.37v	F	1.385
Injured much of career. Is athletic, has good feet, quickness and adequate range. Felt he hustled & showed the ability to make plays outside the tackle box. Will get tall inline & needs to shed blocks more consistently. Lacks A-1 closing speed. Is not there yet, but you are going to have to take this player far earlier then his skill & production level would indicate. No sacks as a college player. Problems locating ball on misdirections (see Wake Forest) Round 3 – 4..
98	Laws	Trevor	Notre Dame	DT	6006v	304v	5.13v	G	1.396
Works his butt off. Has very good quickness, plays with leverage and has good strength in his hands. Very intense and physical. Play effort was second to none. Might not be quick or stout enough to play a nose A physical drive through tackler. Will fight you, but diesn’t always play big inside (got covered up some by big people). Has limitations, but overall was a very solid football player. Has stong early second day draft potential.
96	Fluellen	Andre	Florida St	DT	6007v	296v	5.06v	G	1.436
Not ideal size although flashed outstanding quicks, plays hard and gave backside effort. Combative & disruptive within the running game. Can dominate, but will also disappear. Vs the pass his main attribute was his quickness into the “A” gap & burst to the QB. Played injuried for virtually the entire 07 season. When healthy this guy is far better player then he showed in 07. Senior bowl effort was impressive. Round 4 – 5.
97	Okam	Frank	Texas U	DT	6044v	347v	5.37v	E	1.481
A big wide body who showed body control & quicks. Plays high, but teams still had a difficult time moving him on the inside. Is very smart (both on and off the field) and experienced, but has no heart or playing character. A underachiever in my opinion. Just not a nasty rub your face in the dirt type (no edge). Overall, you just don’t know what you are going to get with this player. Wouldn’t consider in day 1, but recognize his talent and physical tools. Rd 4.
95	Sims	Patrick	Auburn U	DT	6021v	310v	5.11v	E	1.485
Has stability issues which need to be addressed. Played much of 07 with a cast on his lt .hand (Fx). Has size, but needs to redefine his body (very soft middle & butt). Flashed get off quick, but lacks stamina and his overall competitive effort. When he kept his pads down, got some push (So Florida), but when they were up got knocked around pretty good (LSU). Has talent, but wouldn’t risk a first day selection based on his history. Round # 4
85	Bryant	Joseph	Texas A&M	DT	6041v	318v	5.06v	F	1.486
A big, tough, strong inside guy who played hard, but consistently got his pads up working inside. Is stout and difficult to move around, but did not protect his legs or get over trash effectively. Got some inside push as a bull rusher, but lacks counter skills and change of direction. Gave up far too much blocking surface and has had some lower body injuries which need to be considered. Best suited to play tackle in a 3-4 look. Makes your team, but has limitations.
71	Rubin	Ahtyba	Iowa State U	DT	6026v	315v	5.24v	F	1.516
Offensive tackle as a Juco player. Big man who has improved a great deal over the past 2 seasons. Is very strong, but is in every sense of the word a work in progress.Showed quickness and some playing range. Can stack inside particularly when he kept his pads down. Questionable play instincts and was inconsistent to find the ball on the inside. Felt his playing effort varried Draft consideration; rounds 5 to 6.
96	Dykes	Keilen	West Virginia U	DT	6033v	294v	5.10e	F	1.518
A very tough, strong, nose who was a very effective run stopper. Plays very hard, is unselfish and was a consistent performer. Could also play a three technioue. Is a run stopper who had a good feel for blocks and restricted the “A” gap. Has adequate range, but needs to protect his lower half more effectively. Marginal pass rusher who showed limited counter skills. Blue collar player who will contribute to winning football games. Round 4 – 5.
94	Dixon	Marcus	Hampton U	DT	6040v	292v	5.27v	F	1.550
Good looking athlete with size & power. Can stack inside effectively. Good 1st step quicks, hand use & the ability to find the ball. For the most part a bull rusher, but has some counter ability & close. Has a long way to come in terms of learning how to play.. Plays on his feet and is highly intelligent. Involved in a highly publicized rape incident down in Georgia and served 15 months, but was later cleared of the charges. Great young man 4th to 5th rd potential.
95	Robinson	Nate	Akron U	DT	6037v	324v	5.15e	E	1.680
Highest rated prep DT in the country. Signed with Miami and briefly attended Rutgers. Just don’t know who is going to show up from game to game. Has a great deal of talent and size. Flashes initial quickness and some explosiveness in his hips and hands. Very limited rush skills (very moves rush moves and or counters). Showed a tendency to wear down in games (questionable conditioning and stamina).A lot of talent, but something is missing here.
56	Foster	Eric	Rutgers U	DT	6011v	271v	5.00e	G	1.731
Undersized defender who showed good initial quickness, range (runs well), leverage, and use of hands. Liked his competitive effort (showed consistent energy) and effort. His physical stature (or lack of) limits play to that of a tackle in a 3-4 scheme. Is going to have to get stronger, but this guy reminds me a great deal of Rams tackle La’ Roi Glover at a similar stage. Late round (6th to 7th ) draft consideration.
95	Smith	Henry	Texas A&M	DT	6023v	310v	5.19v	F	1.795
A JC guy with play strength who played with good pad level inside. Has a good body, played with good leverage and got some pretty good inside push. Was inconsistent to find the football inside and his feel for blocks was just adequate. Needs to finish better and I don’t believe he has top playing range. Not there yet, but has has some of the things you look for in an inside player. Has an outside chance of being drafted, but is more likely a priority free agent.
99	Powell	Carlton	Virginia Tech	DT	6022v	292v	5.14v	G	1.796
Just not a very physical player (played with far too much finesse) Didn’t play through blocks (Never saw him fight across the face of a blocks to the ball). Wasn’t stout at the point of attack nor was he heavy handed. Good snap reaction and gap penetration. Worked well on his stunts and hustled in pursuit. Is not void of skills, but is going to have to improve in a number of area’s if he is to play at the professional level. Has late round (7th) or priority free agent.
96	Johnston	Brian	Gardner Webb	DT	6050v	278v	4.97v	J	1.800
A 4 year regular who certainly was a good player, but is going to have to improve hand use, and ability to shed, to be a difference maker. A former linebacker. Showed a marginal ability to get over trash and get to the football. As a pass rusher, played with power, but doesn’t have a real plan after his initial engagement. Is an effort guy, but I just don’t see any special skills. Possible late round selection, but is more likely a priority free agent prospect.
97	Shirley	Jason	Fresno St	DT	6052v	329v	5.04v	E	1.799
Is a great looking individual, but was not a particularly good football player. Very much an underachiever. Was dismissed from the squad furing the 2007 season. Inner city LA background. Some off field concerns. Might be worth a look on the offensive side of the football if his off the field issues are found to be satisfactory.
93	McClinton	James	Kansas U	DT	6000v	293v	5.54v	F	1.800
Active undersized three technique. Has initial quickness but I didn’t see the long speed and or range. Has been productive, but didn’t get off blocks especially well. As a pass rusher, comes hard, but if he doesn’t beat you with his initial movement, the game was over. Lacks closing burst to the football. Just don’t see how he could play above 285 lbs. Good college player, but limited chance to factor. Priority free agent player