|
Quinton Coples DE North Carolina #90
|
||
 |
Ht: 6’6″Wt: 272 |  |
| Strengths: | ||
| A physical specimen. Nice combination of size and athleticism. Has all the physical tools necessary to be an elite player at the next level. Displays flashes of dominance. Has the strength and quickness that most collegiate offensive linemen can’t compete with. Quick off the snap. Has experience at tackle and end (primarily played inside in 2010, shifted outside in 2011). Some experience lining up at end in 3-4 sets. Strong lower body; has a decent bull rush. Reliable wrap-up tackler; has long arms to secure the ball carrier. | ||
| Weaknesses: | ||
| Terribly inconsistent; coming off a very disappointing and up-and-down senior year. Didn’t appear to play with the same motor in 2011 as he did as a junior in 2010. Raw athleticism doesn’t translate to the field; won’t be an elite Julius Peppers-type pass rusher at the next level as some expected from him entering senior year. Doesn’t have a wide array of pass rush moves; relies primarily on outside speed or a bull rush. Needs to play with better leverage; height works to his disadvantage at times. Academic issues in high school; forced to attend Hargrave Military Academy before enrolling at North Carolina. Investigated for potential NCAA violations in spring of 2011 but no penalties were issued. | ||
| Comments: | ||
| Coples’ ceiling is as high as just about anyone in this draft class, but I’m always wary of elite physical specimens who have a disappointing final season in college – it is often an indication of a lack of effort and desire to be great. Coples had his fair share of big plays as a senior, but too often was taken out of games by inferior offensive linemen (most notably vs Miami left tackle Brandon Washington). At times he reminds me Ray Edwards – limited pass rush, but solid three-down lineman – but Coples has a huge bust factor. He may be a top-10 talent, but isn’t worth the risk. He’s a much safer bet in the late 1st or even 2nd round. | ||
| Videos: | ||
| 2011 vs Clemson 2011 vs Miami 2010 vs Tennessee (bowl game) 2010 vs Virginia Tech |
||
Category: Scouting Reports – 2012
Zach Brown scouting report
|
Zach Brown LB North Carolina
|
||
 |
Ht: 6’2″ Wt: 235 |
|
| Strengths: | ||
| Elite athleticism. Rare speed for the linebacker position; also runs on track team. Very fluid dropping back in coverage. Plenty of experience in zone coverage; often plays four to five yards off the line of scrimmage and drops into coverage, essentially acting as an extra safety. Does a nice job keeping his eyes in the backfield and reading the quarterback. Experience lining up at inside and outside linebacker. Fairly reliable tackler. Has the speed to cause problems as a pass rusher off the edge. | ||
| Weaknesses: | ||
| Undersized; lacks ideal height and bulk. Struggles to shed blocks once he’s engaged with an offensive lineman; lacks the strength to battle at the line of scrimmage. Lacks the instincts of your typical NFL inside linebacker; easily frozen on play fakes and misdirection plays. Stats are misleading; always around the football due to his speed, but not always the first one there due to his poor instincts. | ||
| Comments: | ||
| Brown has the raw athleticism to be a starter at the next level but is far from a polished product. His speed makes him stand out, and Carolina defensive coordinator/linebackers coach Art Kaufman does an excellent job putting him position to make plays, but Brown does very little to create big plays on his own. His 2011 film vs Clemson provides a great example of his misleading statistics – Brown records two sacks in the game but is completely untouched by the Clemson offensive line on both plays. In each case it was a result of a missed assignment by Clemson, due more to inept offensive line play and great play calling by the Carolina defensive coaches than due to Brown’s ability. Teams should be cautious of falling in love with Brown’s 1st-round potential, when his performance is more of a 3rd or 4th round caliber player. | ||
| Videos: | ||
| 2011 vs Clemson 2010 vs Tennessee (bowl game) |
||
Justin Blackmon scouting report
|
Justin Blackmon WR Oklahoma State
|
||
 |
Ht: 6’1″
Wt: 211 |
 |
| Strengths: | ||
| Good overall size. Elite strength. A physical receiver who can easily fight through press coverage at the line of scrimmage. Big, strong hands. Shows the ability make the tough catch in the traffic. Efficient route runner; makes quick, clean cuts to gain separation. A tough runner after the catch; willing to take a hit and drag defenders with him. Has a reputation for being a hard worker off the field. | ||
| Weaknesses: | ||
| Effort and focus appears to be lacking at times; he’ll make the tough catches but then drop an easy one. Arrested and suspended for one game for a DUI charge in 2010. Speed is adequate, but lacks the burst to be consistent deep threat. | ||
| Comments: | ||
| Blackmon’s biggest obstacle will be convincing teams that his character concerns – both off-field incidents and on-field lack of focus – will not effect his performance at the next level. He has a similar skill set to former teammate Dez Bryant, and his effectiveness in the same offensive scheme is reason to believe he can take his game to the next level. In terms of his on-field transition to the next level, Blackmon will need to become more of a possession receiver. Oklahoma State’s spread offense opens up space for Blackmon which he will not be able to create at the next level. Don’t expect him to light up the NFL from day one, but given a year or two develop he should begin to show Pro Bowl caliber skills. | ||
| Videos: | ||
| 2011 vs Arizona 2011 vs Texas A&M 2011 vs Kansas State 2010 vs Baylor |
||
Luke Kuechly scouting report
|
Luke Kuechly ILB Boston College
|
||
 |
Ht: 6’3″
Wt: 235 |
 |
| Strengths: | ||
| Good overall size and strength. Plenty of experience; starter since true freshman season. Intelligent on and off the field. Team leader on defense; will occasionally make pre-snap adjustments. Elite instincts and awareness. Looks comfortable dropping into zone coverage; does a nice job keeping his eyes in backfield and reading quarterback. Shows sideline-to-sideline playmaking ability. Not the fastest athlete, but makes up for it with impressive anticipation and by taking great angles. Very reliable, fundamental tackler. | ||
| Weaknesses: | ||
| Lacks fluid athleticism to excel in man coverage. Will struggle against most pass-catching tight ends and running backs at the next level. Strength is decent, but not enough to pose a threat as a pass rusher up the middle; if an interior lineman gets his hands on him, he struggles to disengage. | ||
| Comments: | ||
| Kuechly is a James Laurinaitis clone. Nothing about his measurables make him look like an elite NFL talent, but he more than makes up for it in preparation and instincts. He is as polished as a 20-year-old college linebacker can be and should have no issues immediately stepping into a starting lineup. | ||
| Videos: | ||
| 2011 vs UCF 2011 vs Florida State 2010 vs Nevada (bowl game) 2010 vs Notre Dame 2010 vs Clemson |
||
Manti Te’o scouting report
|
Manti Te’o ILB Notre Dame #4
|
||
 |
Ht: 6’2″ Wt: 255 |
 |
| Strengths: | ||
| Prototypical size and strength. Excels against the run. Reliable tackler; a hard hitter but also has great fundamentals and rarely misses an open-field tackle. Does a decent job shedding blocks to get into the backfield. Adequate speed; shows sideline-to-sideline ability. Exceptional vision; keeps eyes in the backfield and does an excellent job reacting to the ball carrier and putting himself in position to make plays. A team leader on the field. | ||
| Weaknesses: | ||
| Marginal coverage ability. Limited experience in man coverage and may lack the fluid athleticism to match up with some of the NFL’s elite pass-catching tight ends and running backs. Doesn’t have speed to stick with tight ends on deep routes; needs to be supported by a safety when asked to drop into coverage. | ||
| Comments: | ||
| Te’o is a polished run defender who has the skills to play inside or outside at the next level. He may actually be best suited to shift to strong-side linebacker in a scheme which requires more pass rushing and less dropping into coverage. His upside is limited somewhat due to average athleticism, but his fundamentals and on-field awareness have already developed to the point where he is one of the safest bets in this year’s draft class. | ||