|
Josh Chapman DT Alabama #99
|
||
 |
Ht: 6’1″
Wt: 316 |
 |
| Strengths: | ||
| Prototypical nose tackle. A big, physical presence in the middle of the defensive line; a true space-eater. Fairly quick off the snap for a big man. Has a powerful bull rush which requires the attention of two offensive linemen. Does a nice job using leverage to hold his ground at the point of attack. Gives an honest effort in pursuit, despite his lack of speed; rarely gives up on a play. Tough guy who played through torn ACL for much of senior year. | ||
| Weaknesses: | ||
| Limited athletically; won’t make plays in pursuit and will rarely get to the quarterback. Short and stocky; doesn’t have the height or the arm length to disrupt passing lanes and rarely even puts in the effort. Fairly easily slowed down by double teams; lacks the elite size or strength to consistently plow through into the backfield. Suffered a torn ACL which required surgery in January, 2011. Missed entire 2007 season with shoulder injury (redshirted). | ||
| Comments: | ||
| Chapman is intriguing due to his size, and he can definitely play nose tackle at the next level, but he lacks the elite measurables to warrant a high pick. While he does have the strength to take on multiple blockers, he struggles to shed blocks and become disruptive in the backfield. He’s the type of player that does everything reasonable well, but nothing great and has a limited ceiling as a result. Assuming his knee checks out, he’s a very safe mid-round pick, but may only be a backup in the NFL. | ||
| Videos: | ||
| 2010 season | ||
Category: Scouting Reports – 2012
Harrison Smith scouting report
|
Harrison Smith S Notre Dame #22
|
||
 |
Ht: 6’2″Wt: 213 |  |
| Strengths: | ||
| Prototypical size and strength for a strong safety. Smart, patient player; does a nice job staying in his space and not biting on fakes or over-pursuing. Some experience blitzing off the edge; gets a nice jump and is quick enough to evade blockers in the backfield. Consistently takes the correct angles in pursuit and is a real asset in run support. Keeps his eyes in the backfield and is quick to adjust; adept at reading the quarterback’s eyes. Adequate straight-line speed. | ||
| Weaknesses: | ||
| Limited ball skills; 7 interceptions as junior were misleading, many a result of being in right place at right time. More fast than quick. Limited athleticism; doesn’t have the change-of-direction ability necessary to stick with more athletic tight ends and running backs in coverage; also gets juked out of potential tackles too often; simply lacks the quick feet and smooth hips to stay with pure athletes in the open field. | ||
| Comments: | ||
| Smith is an intriguing prospect who should make an immediate impact on special teams and may have a future as a starter at strong safety. When moving forward (playing the run) he looks like a legitimate top-50 pick, and is clearly an asset when playing in tight spaces. When asked to make plays on the move however, such as in coverage, his limited athleticism starts to slow him down. In the right system he can be a quality starter, but his skill set won’t interest every team. | ||
| Videos: | ||
| 2011 vs Stanford | ||
Joe Adams scouting report
|
Joe Adams WR Arkansas #3
|
||
 |
Ht: 5’11”
Wt: 179 |
 |
| Strengths: | ||
| Dangerous return man (returned four punts for touchdowns in 2011). A threat to take it the distance every time he touches the ball. Elite change-of-direction ability. Good vision as a runner. Some experience lining up in the backfield. Does a nice job tracking the ball over his shoulder on deep routes. Adjusts to poorly thrown balls. | ||
| Weaknesses: | ||
| Undersized. Lacks the physical skills to fight for the ball in traffic. Durability could be an issue due to size. Suffered a mild stroke in 2009. Route running is sloppy; can break free due to his speed, but struggles to fight through press coverage. | ||
| Comments: | ||
| Adams is a dangerous weapon, but he’s limited in what he can do on the field. In certain packages, and on special teams, he can be a serious threat. But he isn’t the type of receiver who can consistently pose a threat throughout the course of the game – at least not until he adds some strength and improves his route running. As a result, Adams should be viewed as a luxury pick, not as a core player that you can build around. | ||
| Videos: | ||
| 2011 vs Ole Miss | ||
Nick Toon scouting report
|
Nick Toon WR Wisconsin #1
|
||
 |
Ht: 6’2″
Wt: 215 |
 |
| Strengths: | ||
| Prototypical size and overall build. Does a great job going up in traffic and making plays. Shows great body control; looks comfortable along the sideline. Does a nice job adjusting to poorly thrown balls. Tough receiver; willing to go across the middle. Strong route runner; very quick with his cuts. Gives a solid effort as a blocker. NFL bloodlines; father, Al, played receiver for the Jets. | ||
| Weaknesses: | ||
| Limited straight-line speed; not a serious threat to stretch the field. Lacks the quickness to shake defenders; may struggle to consistently get open at the next level and will need to be a pure possession receiver. Missed time with turf toe injury in 2010 and also a thigh bruise. | ||
| Comments: | ||
| What you see is what you get with Toon, which is both good and bad. The downside is he has a limited upside. But the positive is he is a very safe mid-round prospect. He was a solid No. 1 in college, but lacks that something extra to make him stand out as an NFL prospect. He does everything fairly well, but nothing great. Toon should be able to contribute at the next level, but will never be a difference maker. | ||
| Videos: | ||
| 2011 vs Nebraska | ||
Stephen Hill scouting report
|
Stephen Hill WR Georgia Tech #5
|
||
 |
Ht: 6’4″Wt: 215 |  |
| Strengths: | ||
| Elite height. Fairly well built; strong enough to fight through press coverage. Elite leaping ability, a serious threat in the red zone. Excellent hands; will come down with some tough catches in traffic. Above-average straight-line speed, especially considering his size; has the ability to stretch the field. Gets up to full speed surprisingly quickly; will blow past cornerbacks if they’re not prepared for his speed. Does a nice job tracking the ball in the air; easily adjusts to poorly thrown balls (and he’s had a lot of practice at this at Georgia Tech). Tough runner after the catch; willing to lower his shoulder and fight for extra yardage. Experience returning kicks. Blocking skills are well above average for a collegiate receiver. | ||
| Weaknesses: | ||
| Only expected to run a limited number of routes at Georgia Tech due to their triple-option attack. Route running is somewhat sloppy; not fluid making his cuts and will need to become more crisp and fluid in his movements to excel at the next level. Numbers are misleading; produced a number of big plays, but benefited from timely play calls which took advantage of defenses preparing for the triple-option and forgetting about the pass. Loses focus at times; makes some acrobatic catches, but he’ll drop some very easy ones too. | ||
| Comments: | ||
| From a pure raw talent standpoint, Hill is an elite prospect. He has the raw skills necessary to be a true No. 1 at the next level. However, he is very raw. He comes from a triple-option offense which forced him to run a limited array of routes. And even on the routes he did run, he looked sloppy and not very explosive in his cuts. However, the triple-option did develop his running and blocking skills which are both well above average. As a result, if he ever develops his route running skills, he will be the complete package. Hill’s upside should land him in the top 50 picks, and he may even draw consideration in the late 1st round. He’s a risky pick that high, and won’t contribute much as a rookie, but could end up being a steal three years down the road. | ||
| Videos: | ||
| 2011 vs UNC 2011 vs Georgia, Middle Tennessee |
||