NFL Draft Rankings – C/G:
G:
1
Emmanuel Pregnon
School: Oregon
Ht/Wt: 6’4”, 314 lbs
Strengths:
– An abundance of power.
– Hand strikes are highly effective.
– When he anchors you know there is going to be no movement. He locks in.
– Strength to handle the strongest pass rushers.
– A large frame with the necessary mass for work in the interior.
– Blocks very well in a phone booth. Generates considerable forward push in the run game.
– Is a road grater. Plays with a tough mentality, and makes sure to play through the whistle.
– Long arms swing leverage battles in his favour.
– LG/RG versatility.
Weaknesses:
– Falls a bit short when it comes to athleticism.
– Someone who mostly will have to stay close to come.
– Lacks the athleticism to block with consistency on the move, beyond just simple stuff horizontally across the line of scrimmage.
– Quick rushers can exploit his edge.
– There are times where he oversets, leaving himself vulnerable to a counter.
– Overaged prospect.
Summary:
Pregnon has the size, strength, and tough mentality that offensive line coaches look for in a draft prospect. His anchor is firm, and in the run game, he generates a considerable amount of push. Athletically, he leaves some to be desired. This results in his rush edge sometimes being exposed, as well as limitations as a blocker in space. He’ll be a scheme specific player, requiring one that is power-based and allows him to remain close to home near the line of scrimmage. In the right system, his natural power and tough demeanor will shine. That’s not to say the limitations won’t still show up, but they would be more limited. There is some technical stuff he can clean up as well, but even still, Pregnon could be a starter on day 1.
| Grade: 82.1 | Round Grade: 2nd |
2
Chase Bisontis
School: Texas A&M
Ht/Wt: 6’5”, 315 lbs
Strengths:
– Maximum effort through the whistle.
– Good lateral agility to slide and seal up his rush edge to prevent twitchy gap shooters from getting through.
– Quick enough feet to block in space.
– Able to seal the edge.
– Can block upfield on the move, as well.
– Good anchor strength.
– Able to generate power against players with a big size advantage.
– Solid blocker in a phone booth. With his athletic traits, he is a scheme versatile player.
Weaknesses:
– Arm length is far below average. Shows up especially on some plays where he whiffs.
– Whiffs show up from time to time in both phases.
– You’ll see him lunge from time to time in an effort to compensate.
– Footwork can also get sloppy, and he doesn’t square up to his opponent.
– Instances where he’ll overrun his target when blocking on the move.
– Can match up with power against stronger players, but it’s not foolproof. There are still times they can give him some trouble.
– Pad level can sometimes get a bit high.
Summary:
Bisontis is a good all around G prospect who can play in different schemes. He is an easy mover, with the ability to block in space. He also gets a decent amount of power when asked to block closer to hope. Although he does have some trouble in some matchups, he generally anchors well, even when going up against bigger players. His biggest issues come due to his lack of arm length. Bisontis will whiff on some of his blocks, and it is in these moments where those extra couple of inches would make a difference. He seems to overcompensate at times, which leads to rushed plays and abandoned technique. While Bisontis does have some issues, they were relatively limited. His arm length did cause some, but if he can avoid exacerbating the issue by overcompensating, he should largely be fine. His athleticism and strength are enough that he’ll still be a good starter at G.
| Grade: 81.0 | Round Grade: 2nd |
3
Olaivavega Ioane
School: Penn State
Ht/Wt: 6’4”, 320 lbs
Strengths:
– Possesses raw power.
– When he strikes first, you see some pop.
– When his technique is polished, he makes it tough for his opponent to disengage once he latches on.
– Capable of anchoring in pass protection.
– Can block in a phone booth and pave lanes in the run game.
– Well built frame to match up against beefy interior linemen.
– Capable of sealing up the edge when operating a quick pull.
– Looks for work when unoccupied.
Weaknesses:
– Limited athlete.
– Rush edge is leaky.
– Lacks the twitch to not have some breakdowns against gap shooters.
– Too slow when opposing team runs a stunt and he has to pass off.
– Slow getting to his spot on longer pulls.
– Generally not great at blocking in space.
– Allows opponent to get multiple hand strikes into his chest.
– Inconsistent playing with leverage.
– Sometimes allows opponent to get under his pad and push him back.
– Had struggles against a good Ohio State DL. Some issues with Indiana too.
Summary:
Ioane has natural strength and power that can translate at the next level. When at his best, he is anchoring in pass protection, digging his feet in and not allowing any forward push from his opponent. He is able to block in a phone booth, which is where he is at his best in the run game. When he initiates contact, Ioane is able to get the necessary push to open up a nice lane. Despite the hype, I thought his tape was very inconsistent. He is a limited athlete, and his rush edge looked leaky at times. As well, opposing players were able to overwhelm him with hand strikes or get under his pads, both of which resulted in him being the one taking steps backwards. Quick passes helped him out in most of these cases, and the end result never really ended up poorly as a result of him. However, these issues will become more prominent at the NFL level, if not addressed. The athletic limitations will be there, and he will be a scheme specific player. There are technical issues that need to be fixed, but if he can clean them up, Ioane has the natural strength and the size to be a solid starter at G.
| Grade: 78.9 | Round Grade: 3rd |
4
Gennings Dunker
School: Iowa
Ht/Wt: 6’5”, 319 lbs
Strengths:
– A true mauler. Arguably the toughest player in this class.
– Versatility to play OT or G.
– Strong player with the ability to anchor against any opponent. Once he locks in, you’re not getting any push.
– A road grader in the run game. Looks right away to plough his opponent forward and open up a lane for the ball carrier.
– Has the frame to match his play style.
– Plays through the whistle and doesn’t give anyone a break.
– Hand strikes are jarring.
– Able to block on the move, and can send smaller players flying when he lands his block.
– Was one of the best offensive linemen at the Senior Bowl.
Weaknesses:
– Was an OT in college, but limited athleticism likely sees him kick inside to G.
– At OT, he lacks the lateral agility and smooth footwork to consistently mirror speed rushers.
– Sometimes oversets when up against speed, leaving him vulnerable to inside counters.
– By G standards athleticism is decent enough, but nothing special.
– Technique is raw and needs further development. Switch to G may add to that.
– A lot of lunging and whiffed blocks. Needs to do a better job of staying square to his opponent.
– Lack of quickness will see him challenged by stunts and twists.
– Hand placement and timing can be inconsistent.
– Pad level gets high at times.
Summary:
Dunker is arguably the toughest player in this class. A glass eater, road grater. Someone with a mean streak. They all apply. He has the frame and strength to back up this style. He anchors well in pass protection and can bulldoze people in the run game to open up lanes. A college OT, he lacks the athleticism to stick out there, but he can still play the position in a pinch. The versatility will be nice. On the inside, he has enough to block on the move, and you’ll certainly notice when he lands those blocks against smaller players. Still, even by G standards, his athleticism is probably average. Where he really will need to improve is on the technical side. His footwork could get better, pad level, hand timing/placement etc. He also lunges and oversets too often, which leads to leaky edges. Dunker definitely has starter upside. The flashes will make it tempting to throw him out there right away. However, he’ll benefit from some time in a depth role, where he can continue to grow as a player. In time, I see him being a starter.
| Grade: 77.0 | Round Grade: 3rd |
5
Keylan Rutledge
School: Georgia Tech
Ht/Wt: 6’4”, 316 lbs
Strengths:
– Is a glass eater.
– Tremendous natural strength.
– Has the size, strength, and power to anchor against any pass rusher.
– Moves people in the run game. When his hand strikes land, they generate considerable pop, and are able to disrupt the rush plan of his opponent.
Weaknesses:
– Very raw from a technical standpoint.
– Footwork is often sloppy and he can have trouble protecting his rush edges.
– Feet look a bit heavy at times, and hips can be stiff. He is capable of blocking on the move, but I wouldn’t say it is his strong suit.
– Athleticism isn’t horrible on tape, but certainly doesn’t match the testing.
– Instead of staying square, he often lunges and finds himself out of position. This opens up gaps for his opponents.
– Pad level elevates too much, too often. It partially offsets his strength advantage and sees him get pushed back.
Summary:
Rutledge enters the NFL with the potential to end up as a starter one day. He has the nasty demeanour that coaches look for in offensive lineman, always looking to flatten someone, and always playing to the whistle. His strength and power are standout traits that further point to this potential. However, at this moment, he is still technically unrefined. His footwork, balance, and positional awareness will have to improve. Additionally, he will have to stay focused on keeping a low pad level. Athletically, there are times where he looks a bit laboured, but he isn’t incapable of blocking on the move, so he could potentially play in different schemes, even if the success rate is varying. Right now, there are too many leaks to project him as a day 1 starter. But with some development, he can get there and be a mainstay.
| Grade: 74.5 | Round Grade: 4th |
6
Jalen Farmer
School: Kentucky
Ht/Wt: 6’5”, 312 lbs
Strengths:
– Strong, powerful player.
– Has a firm anchor when playing with good technique.
– Highly effective run blocker.
– Blocks with power and strength when left in a phone booth. Creates a considerable amount of forward movement.
– Good at sealing edges in the run game.
– Hand strikes are powerful and effective.
Weaknesses:
– Slide quickness is a bit lacking, and he can let quicker players shoot through the gap.
– Has some trouble staying square to his opponent. Leaning opens up some space around the rush edge, and he is left blocking in an unfavourable situation, sometimes even getting close to holding.
– Lateral agility isn’t great on tape, and he moves with heavy feet.
– Can have some trouble getting to his spot when blocking on the move.
– Hand placement can improve.
Summary:
Farmer is a player who brings strength and power to the table. You see his potential in pass protection when he is setting a firm anchor and not allowing any forward push. However, his pass protection as a whole is still a work in progress. Some athletic limitations are exasperated by sloppy technique, opening up gaps for rushers. He is a bit clunky on his feet, and he sometimes misses his mark when blocking in space. But when he lands his block, you notice. When blocking closer to home, he is able to open running lanes by either paving people out of the way or by sealing up edges. In this area, he can contribute right away. On a run oriented team, it wouldn’t be shocking to see them plug him in and let his pass protection grow as he goes. But ideally, he’ll have some time to further develop before starting sometime down the line, preferably in a power oriented scheme.
| Grade: 73.8 | Round Grade: 4th |
7
Anez Cooper
School: Miami
Ht/Wt: 6’6”, 334 lbs
Strengths:
– Big, well built frame.
– Size alone makes it tough for opponents to get around him.
– Elite length for the position.
– Good strength with the ability to anchor in pass protection.
– Once he is engaged, he rarely allows his opponent out.
– Can create push in the run game.
– Heavy hands, generates some pop in his strikes.
Weaknesses:
– A sluggish mover who has some trouble when blocking in space.
– Gap shooters also give him a tough time.
– Pad level gets high at times, which partially negates the leverage advantage that comes with his length.
– Is slow to slide, and isn’t always able to seal up leaky edges.
– Hand placement is inconsistent.
– Stunts and twists cause some issues.
Summary:
Cooper has a massive frame, even by G standards, and comes with elite length. It allows him to play with natural leverage. He can anchor in pass protection, not allowing any movement once he engages with his opponent. As well, his run blocking near the line of scrimmage is effective. His strength and power allows him to pave laneways for the ball carrier. With a tall frame, he does have a tendency to get the pad level too high. It is common for these kinds of players, but needs to be kept under control, or he loses some of that leverage advantage that comes with his length. His biggest weakness is athleticism. Sluggish movements prevent him from sliding in time to secure the edges against quick rushers. Stunts and twits also cause issues. In the run game, he is much better closer to home than he is on the move. Cooper has his limitations, but with technical refinement, could end up starting one day. It will likely have to be in a power-based scheme for him to be at his best. For now, he likely serves as a depth option, until those fixes are made.
| Grade: 71.1 | Round Grade: 4th |
8
Billy Schrauth
School: Notre Dame
Ht/Wt: 6’5”, 310 lbs
Strengths:
– Solid blend of athletic ability and strength.
– Has enough strength to stay decently firm against bull rushes.
– Slide quickness is good, and his passoffs are smooth.
– Able to handle twitchier pass rushers.
– Not perfect, but is a solid blocker in space. Good on pulls across the line.
– Does well to stay square to his opponent and limit extra space opening up at one of his rush edges.
Weaknesses:
– Traits are good, but not elite in any one area.
– Has the strength to handle power, but more of his wins are closer to stalemates than true anchor downs. You can see a little strain.
– Athleticism is in the same boat. Good enough to function as a move blocker, but he isn’t perfect and will sometimes miss his mark.
– Hand timing can improve.
– Has had some injury issues over the past couple of years.
Summary:
Schrauth is a solid, reliable interior lineman who can bring consistency with him into the NFL. His strength is good enough to handle power, while his athleticism is good enough to give him scheme versatility. He doesn’t necessarily excel in any one area and his traits are far from elite, so you aren’t getting a ton of upside here. However, he is a contrast from a lot of other prospects in this class that are great in one area, while highly deficient in another. This blend could see him become a solid, if unspectacular starter. If it happens that he is on the bench as a depth guy, that team is probably in a decent position.
| Grade: 70.7 | Round Grade: 4th |
9
Beau Stephens
School: Iowa
Ht/Wt: 6’6”, 315 lbs
Strengths:
– Looks to initiate contact.
– Solid build.
– Enough strength to generate push in the run game.
– Decent anchor ability.
– Athleticism is functional. Capable enough in space.
– LG/RG versatility.
Weaknesses:
– Lacks length, which causes issues.
– Sometimes gets struck first because he lacks the reach to get his strike in on time.
– Lack of length causes him to lose battles for leverage. Has been beaten by the push/pull technique and other rush moves.
– Strength is okay, but not elite. Combined with a high pad level, this leads to instances where he gets pushed back.
– Athleticism is decent enough for pulls, but not good enough where I’d say he really stands out.
Summary:
Stephens doesn’t really stand out in any specific area, but he has enough physical traits to bring a solid floor, even if as a backup. There are instances where he generates push and sets a firm anchor, but success can be matchup dependent. The bigger issue was his lack of length, which does cause some issue for him, at times. Stephens could end up as a low-mid tier starter if all goes well, but he more so projects as a reliable backup. He brings LG/RG versatility, which should help out his spot on the depth chart.
| Grade: 66.6 | Round Grade: 5th |
10
DJ Campbell
School: Texas
Ht/Wt: 6’3”, 313 lbs
Strengths:
– Natural strength and natural length.
– Anchors well against powerful bull rushers.
– Arm length helps allow him to initiate contact and control the rep.
– Generates a good bit of push as a run blocker. Does well to open up running lanes.
– Seals the edge when pulling across the line.
– Looks for work when unoccupied.
Weaknesses:
– Limited athletically.
– Can get caught out by players with good burst. Doesn’t have the slide quickness to manage all the time.
– Recovery ability isn’t great once beaten.
– Stunts and twits cause some issues for him which stem from his athletic limitations.
– Can pull across the line, but feet look heavy when he has to get further out into space.
– Had some penalty issues.
Summary:
Campbell has the natural strength that you look for in an interior lineman. He handles bull rushes well and has shown he can match up with the best of them. His length adds that extra little bit of aid, as it makes it more difficult for opponents to strike his chest. The athletic limitations can’t be ignored. He is sluggish when blocking in space, and twitchier pass rushers do cause him some issues. But in a phone booth, he is a good run blocker. He’ll have to be in a power based scheme in order to maximise his skill set and somewhat hide the limitations, even if they will still hang around. You see these kinds of players sometimes claw their way up into a starting role. Power and grit go a long way at this position. That being said, a reliable depth guy seems like a safer projection, until he can prove suitable for an expanded role.
| Grade: 66.4 | Round Grade: 5th |
11
Micah Morris
School: Georgia
Ht/Wt: 6’5”, 334 lbs
Strengths:
– Good blend of size, strength, and athleticism.
– Can anchor in pass protection.
– Beefy frame swallows up opponents.
– Good movement skills.
– Able to block in space with some effectiveness.
– Blocks well in a phone booth.
– Paves open lanes for the ball carrier when run blocking.
– Has the slide quickness to handle stunts/twists/blitzes.
– Testing at the combine matched up with the tape.
Weaknesses:
– Needs a lot of technical work.
– Pad level gets too high too open the snap.
– Hand placement isn’t centred.
– Doesn’t look to finish off opponents.
– Plays a bit too passive.
– Not really a glass eater.
– Footwork can improve.
Summary:
Morris is someone who comes in with good physical traits. His frame is big and very well built, making it a chore for defences to work around. He has decent enough length, but still loses leverage battles because of poor technique. His pad level gets way too high, which further costs him leverage and puts him in a vulnerable state. Morris’s athleticism is also good for the position. He is capable of executing blocks on the move and has enough juice to reach his benchmarks. The slide quickness is also good for work near the line. His biggest issues come on the technical side. His pad level is too high, too often, and also needs to improve his footwork. I’d also like to see him play with a bit more grit and more of a road grader mentality. Overall, Morris has decent enough traits in both of the two main categories. His combination of strength and athleticism make it apparent that he has the upside to one day be a starter.
| Grade: 65.9 | Round Grade: 5th |
12
Garrett DiGiorgio
School: UCLA
Ht/Wt: 6’7”, 319 lbs
Strengths:
– Versatility to play G or OT.
– Has the build and strength for work on the inside.
– Stays square to his opponent which helps prevent leakage.
– Good run blocker in a phone booth.
– Plays tough, and repeated hand strikes help push his opponent backwards.
– Pad level is quite good for a taller player.
– Impressed at the East-West Shrine Bowl.
Weaknesses:
– Foot quickness is below average, which is why G will likely be his primary position.
– Can have trouble against speed coming around the edge. Twitchy gap shooters are a similar story.
– Effort allows him to have some success as a blocker in space, but athletic limitations lead to inconsistencies in this area.
– Stunts, twists, and blitzes can cause some trouble.
Summary:
DiGiorgio has enough size and strength to go along with his tough playstyle to give him a chance to make it at the next level. He stays square in pass protection, and his mass and strength allow him to hold a decent anchor. His foot quickness is an issue, which puts a big cap on the upside he brings. The limitations aren’t ideal, but in a pinch, he can still make it at OT, even if G is likely his permanent spot going forward. DiGiorgio will have to make it as a depth guy, so the versatility will be nice to have. He projects a functional backup with the versatility to play across the line. In the right system, there is a chance he could become a capable starter.
| Grade: 65.8 | Round Grade: 5th |
13
Jeremiah Wright
School: Auburn
Ht/Wt: 6’5”, 331 lbs
Strengths:
– A mauler.
– Big, beefy frame.
– Good length.
– A chore for defenders to get around.
– Great strength. He flashes the ability to hold up against bull rushes and sustain long enough for the QB to work through his progressions.
– Generates considerable push in the run game.
– Able to seal up the edge when pulling.
Weaknesses:
– Overager prospect.
– Severely lacking footquickness.
– Stunts and twists cause significant problems.
– Also has trouble sealing his edges from twitchy rushers.
– Technique needs to be cleaned up.
– Hand placement and timing can improve.
– Has the power when he lands his blocks, but is inefficient when blocking on the move.
Summary:
Wright has the natural strength that you look for in the position, as well as good length and a beefy frame. His road grader mentality and raw power lead to some standout plays that will definitely catch the eye. But for those highlights, you also get low points that start with a lack of footquickness and overall athleticism. He struggles to keep his edges sealed and also has issues with passoffs. Technical inefficiencies create further issues, but they can be cleaned up in time. Still, there will be valleys to go with the peaks if he is to ever see significant playing time. The strength and power will be enough to land him a depth role, however, and in the right scheme, he could be a decent enough backup.
| Grade: 61.7 | Round Grade: 6th |
14
Evan Beerntsen
School: Northwestern
Ht/Wt: 6’4”, 301 lbs
Strengths:
– Moves pretty well.
– Good slide quickness to adjust to twists and twitchy 3T’s.
– Has the speed to block in space and reach his benchmarks in time.
– Pulls across the line quickly to seal up the edge.
– Plays at a good pad level.
Weaknesses:
– Overager prospect.
– Length is an issue.
– Hands get swept away which causes him to struggle to sustain blocks.
– Strength and power are nothing to write home about. Will have to get stronger.
– Has trouble getting pop into his run blocks, even when on the move.
– Hand strikes see him knocked off balance and pushed back.
Summary:
Beerntsen stands out on tape for his athleticism. He is an easy mover and is able to efficiently reach benchmarks when blocking in space. His slide quickness to handle stunts is also there, while gap shooters aren’t able to just have their way. The flip side is that he lacks length and strength, which leads to some problems. His hands get swiped away, which allows his opponent to then win with a rush move. Despite playing at a good pad level, he isn’t always able to win the leverage battle. There isn’t a lot of power to his game. His run blocking is definitely better on the move, while his pass protection sees him pushed back by violent hand strikes. Getting stronger should help, but he likely will always be on the low side when it comes to overall mass. Some have suggested a move to C, but right now, he only has experience at RG. Proving to be versatile would help his case to stick around as a backup.
| Grade: 60.3 | Round Grade: 6th |
15
Logan Taylor
School: Boston College
Ht/Wt: 6’7”, 314 lbs
Strengths:
– Experience at every position except C.
– Well built and has great length for the position.
– Stays square to his opponent.
– Keeps a calm demeanor. Doesn’t panic and abandon technique.
– Solid athlete who is capable of getting to the second level when blocking on the move.
– Will lend a shoulder if he can, in order to help out a teammate.
Weaknesses:
– As you often see with tall G’s, his pad level can get too high at times.
– Anchor is inconsistent.
– Doesn’t play with as much power as he probably could.
– Hand strikes prove to be effective for defenders, when used on him, and causes him to get pushed back.
– Lateral agility leaves a little to be desired.
Summary:
Taylor has turned in solid play at 4 of the 5 offensive line positions. He is athletic enough to block on the move in the run game, even if he is roughly an average athlete. Additionally, he has good enough length, which might signal more upside. He has a big frame, but I was disappointed with the amount of power he brought to the table. There were times where hand strikes would set him back, or he would lose to a plain bull rush. With his versatility, Taylor will be able to stick around if he can even hold his own in camp/preseasons. But some things will still have to be cleaned up, and he could also stand to get a bit stronger. At the next level, he projects as a multifunctional backup.
| Grade: 60.1 | Round Grade: 6th |
16
Fernando Carmona
School: Arkansas
Ht/Wt: 6’5”, 316 lbs
Strengths:
– Good build with the strength to hold up in both phases.
– Strength is behind some of his best reps in pass protection.
– Gets a good bit of power in his hand strikes, and is then able to hold his anchor firm against bull rushes.
– Slide quickness is underrated.
– OT/G versatility.
– Creates forward push when blocking downhill in the run game.
Weaknesses:
– Length is an issue.
– Lack of length allowed opponents to reset and try again after he set an initial anchor.
– Loses the hand battle that allows rushers to set up their counters.
– Lunges and leans, seemingly in an attempt to make up for length issue, which sometimes exposes additional space in his rush edges.
– Penalties were an issue at times.
Summary:
Carmona is an honest, hard working player. His lunch pail kind of style will be appreciated by coaches. With it, he brings good strength, which allows him to have some success against power. Additionally, he is a functional athlete. Carmona falls short when it comes to arm length, which I think resulted in some of his losses. He loses the leverage battle at the line of scrimmage, and abandoned technique exposes his rush edge, and the defender gets by. He holds his anchor long enough for him to generally still be a solid contributor. NFL competition will be even tougher for him, so you have to take that into account, as well. The limitations lower his floor and ceiling, but there are enough tools for him to be a solid pro in the league. His versatility will help him catch on. And even if he doesn’t always sustain right until the end, he is generally still solid in a more all around sense. Carmona could potentially end up as a quality depth piece, or even beyond. He’ll need a bit of development time, but should be able to get there in time.
| Grade: 58.9 | Round Grade: 7th |
17
Alex Harkey
School: Oregon
Ht/Wt: 6’5”, 313 lbs
Strengths:
– Will play G at the next level, but OT experience could still be handy.
– Has quick feet and good overall athleticism.
– Moves well in space and is an asset as a blocker on the move.
– Scheme versatile player.
– Plays at a good pad level and can maximize his leverage.
– Looks for work when unoccupied.
Weaknesses:
– Overager prospect.
– Footwork is extremely sloppy. Leads to quick losses.
– Length looked to be an issue on tape. Will be a big reason for his likely move inside to G. Rushers with length coming sound the edge took their toll, and had him abandoning technique.
– Lack of length meant that he wasn’t always able to land his strikes in time.
– Strength and anchor ability was an issue at tackle. Will be a bigger issue inside at G. He will have to get stronger.
Summary:
Harkey was a college OT, but lack of length likely sees him kick inside to G. He is a good athlete for a tackle, which means that it is even higher calibre for the G position. You see the benefits when he is blocking on the move, and also on the occasions where he is able to mirror quick rushers. However, his technique is largely all over the place. You see quick losses as a result of lunging and poor footwork, that largely happen because he isn’t able to initiate contact, and then abandons technique in a desperate attempt to recover. With less space to cover, things might be less chaotic on the inside, but his technique has been bad enough that I’d still expect issues. Additionally, his strength and anchoring ability was an issue on the outside, so going up against beefy interior rushers at the next level, there is legit reason for concern. The athletic traits and his frame allow him to enter the league with upside. But Harkey will have to significantly clean up his technique and get considerably stronger in order to be more than a depth guy. He is a developmental project.
| Grade: 58.4 | Round Grade: 7th |
18
Dillon Wade
School: Auburn
Ht/Wt: 6’3”, 316 lbs
Strengths:
– High end athleticism.
– Great slide quickness to adjust to any late happenings in the pocket.
– Good passoff speed, and he reacts well to stunts, twists, and late blitzers.
– Can seal up his edges from gap shooters.
– Moves extremely well in space. It shows when he is asked to pull or block downfield. He’ll get out there in a hurry and easily reach his benchmark
– G/OT versatility.
Weaknesses:
– Frame is lacking in mass, and he tends to get pushed around by stronger players.
– Strains to hold up against bull rushers.
– Often finds himself getting pushed back into the pocket, forcing the QB off his spot.
– Lacks the power to consistently pave lanes from a phone booth.
– Length is also below standard.
– Doesn’t really look to initiate contact.
Summary:
Wade is an elite athlete for the position. His slide quickness is visible in his adjustments on the fly. Twitched up rushers that think they can take advantage of a gap will find that it closes up faster than they think. His speed to get to the second level is extremely impressive, and he does well to reach his bench marks. For the elite athleticism, he is unfortunately lacking in pass, strength, and power. He frequently gets pushed back into the pocket, while also struggling to generate consistent forward push. His movement skills are definitely worth a look at the NFL level. However, Wade will need to get a lot stronger if he is to become more than a depth guy.
| Grade: 57.8 | Round Grade: 7th |
19
Joshua Braun
School: Kentucky
Ht/Wt: 6’6”, 325 lbs
Strengths:
– Well built frame.
– Good length. Really helps with leverage.
– LG/RG versatility.
– Decent strength to hold up against power rushes.
– Can block in a phone booth, open up some lanes in the run game.
– Head is on a swivel. He looks for work when unoccupied.
Weaknesses:
– Overager prospect.
– Lacks bend or twitch.
– Hurts him in pass protection when twitchy rushers look to shoot a gap.
– Even more noticeable when he is blocking in space. His straight line speed is somewhat decent enough to get out there, but defenders adjust their route in anticipation of his arrival, and you can see that the lateral movement skills just aren’t there for him to make a last second adjustment. Misses quite a few blocks in space, as a result.
– Needs to do a better job of finishing his blocks. He can be passive at times.
– Hand technique and footwork can improve.
Summary:
Braun is a big G prospect with natural length to swing leverage battles in his favour. His strength is pretty good and he can hold up against power rushers, showing the ability to anchor down. Straight line speed looks half decent, but he is severely lacking in bend and/or twitch. This causes issues in protection against more agile 3T’s. As well, he struggles to reach his marks as a blocker in space, as a result. There are also technical things that need to be cleaned up. His build, length, and strength are enough for him to get a look late in the draft. Along with his LG/RG versatility, they should help him land a depth role. Unfortunately, athletic limitations may prevent him from being more than a depth player. For a chance to elevate himself beyond that, he’ll have to fix the correctable issues and end up in a scheme that fits his strengths.
| Grade: 55.6 | Round Grade: 7th |
20
Ar’Maj Reed-Adams
School: Texas A&M
Ht/Wt: 6’6”, 314 lbs
Strengths:
– Shows flashes of power in his punch.
– Capable of getting that “pop” out of his strike and disrupting his opponent’s rush.
– Has enough strength to move people in the run game.
– Good length that can help him in battles for leverage.
– RG/LG versatility.
Weaknesses:
– Can get twisted around by rushers with savvy rush moves.
– Push/pull technique is a way to beat him.
– Plays at a high pad level and loses leverage.
– Far too many quick losses.
– Leaning and lunging further opens up his rush edges.
– Allows the defender to initiate contact, which often puts him at an early disadvantage.
– Athleticism isn’t anything special. Better in a phone booth than in space.
Summary:
Reed-Adams shows flashes of some potential. His power specifically is the translatable trait that shows up on tape. When on his game, he is knocking his opponent back with a hand strike, setting a firm anchor, and paving running lanes for the ball carrier. From a technical standpoint, he still needs a lot of work. He leans and lunges too much, and also plays at a pad level that is too high. There were too many quick losses for my liking, which overshadowed the good plays. Reed-Adams has some tools to work with, but comes with athletic limitations and a significant need for development. He could possibly latch onto the back-end of a roster as a rookie. In time, he could work his way up to a more prominent backup position, or beyond.
| Grade: 54.2 | Round Grade: UDFA |
21
Febechi Nwaiwu
School: Oklahoma
Ht/Wt: 6’4”, 319 lbs
Strengths:
– Has made starts at G, OT, and C.
– Able to generate some push as a run blocker.
– Looks for work and will lend a hand to a teammate, when he’s able to.
– High effort player and will play through the whistle.
– Good length, giving the chance to win leverage battles.
– Flashes power and anchor ability as a pass protector.
Weaknesses:
– Poor technique leads to quick losses.
– Lunges and leaning expose his edges to twitched up rushers.
– Athleticism is lacking.
– Doesn’t have the slide quickness to mirror rushes from quicker players.
– Has the strength to anchor, but too inconsistent due to poor technique.
– Lacks the footquickness to block in space.
Summary:
Nwaiwu is a strong player who shows flashes of anchoring ability. There are instances where he opens up nice lanes for the ball carrier, demonstrating some of the upside that he’ll bring to the NFL. However, at this time, he is a project who is underdeveloped in several areas technically, which, along with athletic limitations, lead to too many quick losses. He’ll be worth a look if he can clean up the technical issues. His biggest draw may be that he comes with experience at G, OT, and C. Proving he can be a reliable backup with versatility will help him stick around.
| Grade: 53.0 | Round Grade: UDFA |
C:
1
Connor Lew
School: Auburn
Ht/Wt: 6’4”, 310 lbs
Strengths:
– Moves well.
– Has the slide quickness to handle twitched up rushers looking to cross face.
– Blocks well in space. Has the speed and agility to reach his mark.
– Can pull across the line and help seal up the edge.
– High IQ player, which you need in a C.
Weaknesses:
– Coming off a torn ACL.
– Frame is lean. Needs to add mass.
– Doesn’t play with much power.
– Stalemates more than he wins.
– Better blocker on the move than in a phone booth.
– Powerful hand strikes knock him back.
Summary:
Lew is an athletic player who combines this with a high IQ that allows him to bring solid, consistent play to the C position. He gets into space well in the run game, and has good enough slide quickness to mirror rush attempts. I wouldn’t say he gets pushed around, but he isn’t a powerful player. There are stale mates, and some instances where he concedes ground, even if not catastrophic. His frame looks like it can still add mass, so getting stronger is something he should be able to do. There are technical tweaks that can also be made, but in time, he projects as a solid, if unspectacular starter. Teams will be looking into the injury history, but assuming he is good to go, he could compete for a starting job right away, although growing pains are likely until he is able to better handle power.
| Grade: 77.0 | Round Grade: 3rd |
2
Brian Parker
School: Duke
Ht/Wt: 6’5”, 309 lbs
Strengths:
– Good athlete with fluid movements.
– Played OT and was a good enough athlete for the outside. Becomes higher end with a move to C.
– Blocks well on the move. Speed and footquickness, along with good angles, allow him to reach his benchmarks on time.
– Plays through the whistle and will lend a late shoulder to his opponent, without crossing the penalty threshold.
– Strong enough to set a firm anchor against sawed off edge rushers.
– Has the slide quickness to handle twitchy interior rushers.
– Good hand placement.
Weaknesses:
– Was a college OT, but moves inside due to lack of length.
– Length issue improves on the inside, but can still be an issue in some matchups.
– No experience at C, so this is a projection.
– Enough strength to handle edge rushers, but interior lineman are a different ballgame. I wonder if his current frame won’t translate super well. He’ll need to get stronger.
– Good move blocker, but also needs to get stronger in order to create more push from a phone booth.
Summary:
Parker is an OT prospect who is projected to move inside to C because of length issues. His athleticism is solid for the bookend, but becomes much higher end when looking at him as an interior lineman. He moves well, and should be an asset as a blocker in space. This move to C comes with no actual experience at the position, so of course, it is a projection. And the biggest issue there is to do with overall mass and strength. While he had enough for the edge, he’ll need to add to it in order to match up against the power that comes in the interior. It will likely take a little bit of time, so he probably isn’t a plug and play starter. But if he makes the necessary improvements, I actually really like upside here. His frame looks like it can take additional mass, so that should come in time, and he already has the athleticism and a solid foundation of technical abilities.
| Grade: 75.4 | Round Grade: 3rd |
3
Logan Jones
School: Iowa
Ht/Wt: 6’3”, 299 lbs
Strengths:
– High end athleticism for the position.
– Easily executes pulls that are aimed at sealing up the edge.
– Also blocks well vertically. He gets to the second level quickly, takes good angles, and is able to reach his spot in time to make the block.
– Plays with good technique.
– Stays square to his opponent.
– Has the slide quickness to neutralize twitch and speed on the other side. Can mirror rushes.
Weaknesses:
– Overager prospect.
– Size and length fall below standards, even for a C.
– Length makes it tough for him to initiate contact and also makes it tough for him to win leverage battles. Also makes recovery tough after an early loss.
– Lack of mass makes it tough to hang with the bullies of the interior.
– He gets pushed back by bull rushes.
– Lacks power as a run blocker in a phone booth.
Summary:
In terms of traits, there is a tradeoff with Jones. You’re giving up size, strength, and length, but gaining a high end athlete. He moves very well for a lineman, showing the ability to gracefully execute any kind of block that requires movement. He gets upfield efficiently and is able to get to where he needs to. His slide quickness helps defend against gap shooters, but powerful interior linemen are able to walk him backwards. He will have to get stronger, as he transitions to the next level, but even so, he likely won’t be able to get to a point where the limitation is eliminated completely. As well, the length issue will always be there. But in a zone scheme that lets him play to his strengths, Jones will have the chance to be a starter.
| Grade: 73.5 | Round Grade: 4th |
4
Trey Zuhn
School: Texas A&M
Ht/Wt: 6’7”, 312 lbs
Strengths:
– Starting experience at OT and C.
– Good athleticism.
– Can mirror rushers who can threaten his edges.
– Blocks well in space. Can get upfield quickly and can land his blocks.
– Solid amount of strength to hold his own against power.
– Looks for work.
– Plays with good hand technique.
Weaknesses:
– Footwork looked better at OT than C, which is expected, given his inexperience at the position.
– Frame is on the lean side.
– Strength is good, not great. Certain matchups in the interior will prove to be a handful.
– Switch from OT to C is due to lack of length.
– Length issue showed up in the run game, where he sometimes lunged in order to compensate.
– Average strength and lack of length lead to questions about his ability to sustain blocks.
Summary:
Zuhn is a good athlete who brings the ability to block in space and handle quicker rushes. His lack of length pushes him inside from OT to C, where he has minimal starting experience in college. Naturally, some of the technical aspects looked cleaner at his original position, but that should be fixed in time. Zuhn brings enough strength to hold his own on the inside, but he won’t blow you away with power. Length is the biggest issue, which shows up, in part, with lunges and overcompensation. This will put a cap on his upside, but with some tweaks and cleanups, he has the chance to be a solid starter, who can bring versatility to an o-line room.
| Grade: 73.4 | Round Grade: 4th |
5
Sam Hecht
School: Kansas State
Ht/Wt: 6’4”, 303 lbs
Strengths:
– Technically sound player.
– Stays square to his opponent.
– Good hand placement.
– Build looks better than what is listed.
– Good strength to stall power rushes.
Weaknesses:
– Looks sluggish athletically.
– Lateral movement is limited, and it makes it tough for him to reach his benchmarks when blocking on the move.
– Strength is alright, but he lacks length, which makes it tough to sustain his blocks.
– He is strong enough to stall rushes, but you can see him straining as the rep progresses, and he loses when the counter moves come out.
– Stalemates more than he plays with power. He doesn’t have many dominant reps.
Summary:
Hecht is a technically sound, smart C who should be able to bring a level of reliability with him to the NFL. He plays square to his opponent and works to allow minimal space for gap shooters. His traits, however, are underwhelming. He is strong enough to hold his own, but lack of length negates that in some instances, and he has his troubles sustaining blocks. He is decent in the run game, but better off closer to home, as his foot quickness isn’t a favourable trait for him. At the next level, Hecht will have some issues against physically talented players. But even if he can’t always sustain blocks through the duration of the play, he generally stalls rushes long enough to still be effective. He has the chance to be a low end starter, who makes it on sound technique and high football IQ.
| Grade: 70.5 | Round Grade: 4th |
6
Parker Brailsford
School: Alabama
Ht/Wt: 6’2”, 289 lbs
Strengths:
– Silky smooth athlete.
– Slide quickness to easily make split second reactions and adjustments.
– Has the speed to block up field and the quickness to hit moving targets.
– An asset in the run game as a blocker in space.
– Plays the game with some bite.
– Looks to initiate contact and deliver some pops to disrupt his opponent’s rush.
Weaknesses:
– Frame falls well below NFL standards.
– Lacks the mass to truly go head to head with a beefy NT in the trenches.
– Bull rushes have a tendency to see him walked backwards.
– Not much push generated when run blocking in a phone booth.
– Lacks length to win leverage battles.
Summary:
Brailsford is an interesting case study. He’s got high end athleticism, but this is less impressive once realising he is extremely undersized for an offensive lineman. Starting with the good stuff, anything that allows him to use his athleticism will usually work out well. Pulls, upfield blocks, or mirroring quick rushers. However, the tone setters in the interior can really cause some issues, as he lacks the length to really deal with them. Coaches that run a zone scheme might actually see starter potential in him because of his elite athleticism, while being willing to overlook some of his limitations. But he will have to prove himself before we really start having that conversation. Until then, he projects as a C only depth option. He does have some experience at G, but the mass issue would be further exacerbated at that position.
| Grade: 66.1 | Round Grade: 5th |
7
Jake Slaughter
School: Florida
Ht/Wt: 6’5”, 303 lbs
Strengths:
– Solid in most areas.
– Does a good job of sealing up edges.
– Can redirect players when run blocking.
– Decent enough athleticism to do some work in space.
– Functional strength to go up against power rushers.
– Plays with his head on a swivel.
Weaknesses:
– Frame is on the lean side and length is a bit less than ideal.
– Strength is decent enough to not lose consistently, but he doesn’t win consistently either. He strains to hold his ground, but stronger players really put him to the test.
– Doesn’t often create real push in the run game, and has to just redirect, leaving more recovery opportunity for his opponent.
– Occasional instances of lunging.
– Pad level gets high at times.
Summary:
Slaughter brings consistently solid play, for the most part showing good technique. His strength is functional, as is his athleticism. However, his lack of high end traits also puts a cap on his upside. While he doesn’t lose easily, he also has a tough time dominating reps himself, making for stalemates in the passing game, and more redirecting than bulldozing as a run blocker. Elite physical talents will definitely pose some challenges for him. He might have enough to eventually challenge for a starting spot, but he is more likely to be on the lower end of that spectrum. But without a true glaring weakness, he should be a good, reliable depth option.
| Grade: 65.9 | Round Grade: 5th |
8
Matt Gulbin
School: Michigan State
Ht/Wt: 6’4”, 305 lbs
Strengths:
– Solid build.
– Does well to stay square and not tempt gap shooters with more space than necessary.
– Decent strength to hold his own against power.
– Plays with good hand technique.
– Punch packs some power.
– Straight line speed is good enough to climb to the second level and stack blocks.
– Able to redirect players as a run blocker.
Weaknesses:
– Able to climb to the second level, but lacks the lateral agility to consistently make his blocks beyond what is on that straight path.
– Also has a tough time pulling and dealing with twitchy pass rushers.
– Stunts and twists cause him some trouble.
– Strength to hold his own, but he stalemates more than he wins.
– Sometimes overextends when he feels overmatched.
– Lack of length makes it tougher to sustain blocks.
Summary:
Gulbin has a good enough blend of traits to make it in the league. His functional strength allows him to stall power rushers, while there is enough athleticism for some work in space. That said, he lacks any single high end trait, and sometimes has to settle for hanging in there, rather than truly winning a rep. He stalemates more than he wins in pass protection, generates modest push in the run game, and lacks the lateral agility to execute blocks in space beyond the simple stuff. Moreover, his lack of length will make some matchups challenging. While the limitations likely prevent him from starting, he also doesn’t possess any weakness that is glaring to the point where it pushes him out completely. Gulbin, at the next level, projects as a functional depth player.
| Grade: 64.8 | Round Grade: 6th |
9
Pat Coogan
School: Indiana
Ht/Wt: 6’5”, 311 lbs
Strengths:
– Technically sound player.
– Footwork is clean, no choppiness.
– Stays square to his opponent.
– Plays at a good pad level, not giving away leverage unnecessarily.
– Decent enough strength to hold his own when faced with power rushes.
– Functional athleticism.
Weaknesses:
– No high end traits.
– Enough strength to stall power rushers, but his anchor is not firm.
– Allows some pushback when bombarded with power.
– More of a seal off run blocker rather than someone who can move people.
– Lack of length sometimes causes him to get less into his strike than he would have liked. Also leads to lunging in some instances.
– Athleticism is functional but he is inconsistent in space.
Summary:
Coogan can provide steady play in moderate matchups, but starts to see more negative plays as the talent level rises. He can stalemate, but true power sees him pushed backwards. Athletically, he is capable, but won’t consistently hit moving targets. For the most part, he plays a technically sound game, which is good. But still, you do see instances where his lack of arm length tests his willingness to keep that up. Coogan brings enough to the table to function as a reliable depth option, but it is tough to project him as a potential starter.
| Grade: 63.2 | Round Grade: 6th |
10
James Brockmeyer
School: Miami
Ht/Wt: 6’3”, 297 lbs
Strengths:
– Plays at a good pad level.
– Stays low at a good centre of gravity.
– Wins leverage battles, despite short arms.
– Stronger than you would expect at his size.
– Capable of anchoring.
– Athletic enough to execute pulls.
– Good hand placement and timing.
– Digs his feet as a run blocker and is able to redirect his opponent and prevent displacement.
Weaknesses:
– Frame and mass fall below NFL standards.
– He is actually stronger than he looks, but powerful NT’s at the next level will still cause him trouble in pass protection.
– Doesn’t create much movement in the run game. Has to use leverage just to prevent himself from getting walked back. He does enough to redirect, but it will become tougher in the NFL.
– Sometimes strains a bit to hold his anchor.
Summary:
Brockmeyer is an undersized but technically sound C prospect. He lacks the mass to be a dominant force, but in college, was able to make up for it with good technique. His IQ allowed him to position himself to win leverage battles, despite having short arms. His strength is also better than you’d expect. Still, facing some of the most powerful players at the next level, you’d have to expect some issues. As a run blocker, he held his own, showing that he can use his positional leverage to redirect. However, he isn’t bulldozing any lanes open. He is just preventing displacement from his opponent. It is possible to sustain this at the NFL level, assuming he gets stronger and continues to develop as he moves up. But the ceiling has a cap on it. Athletically, he looked solid on tape, which should help. Though for an undersized player, you could make the argument that it should even be better than it is. As far as his projection goes, Brockmeyer could potentially become a starter in the right scheme, but he’ll always have some limitations. Coaches will appreciate his technique and IQ, and I think he makes it as a backup.
| Grade: 61.1 | Round Grade: 6th |
11
Jager Burton
School: Kentucky
Ht/Wt: 6’4”, 312 lbs
Strengths:
– G/C versatility.
– High end athleticism.
– Has the movement skills to get into space, and the agility to adjust to moving targets.
– Decent length for the position.
– Has a frame with room to grow.
– Possesses the slide quickness to react in time to twists.
Weaknesses:
– Lacks the strength to truly deal with power.
– Hand strikes knock him backwards.
– Bull rushes also see him walked back.
– Doesn’t create much movement in the run game.
– Has the athleticism to block in space, but bad angles sometimes take away from his effectiveness.
Summary:
Burton is a developmental prospect with the athleticism that warrants a late round selection. He moves extremely well in space and has upside in a zone blocking scheme. However, his strength is far below where it needs to be in order to handle NFL power. Additionally, he can take better angles when blocking in space, and clean up other technical aspects of his game. I wouldn’t trust him to see the field early on, but if he can add mass, get stronger, and make other improvements, he has a chance to climb the depth chart.
| Grade: 57.8 | Round Grade: 7th |
G Rankings:
1. Emmanuel Pregnon (82.1, Rd 2)
2. Chase Bisontis (81.0, Rd 2)
3. Olaivavega Ioane (78.9, Rd 3)
4. Gennings Dunker (77.0, Rd 3)
5. Keylan Rutledge (74.5, Rd 4)
6. Jalen Farmer (73.8, Rd 4)
7. Anez Cooper (71.1, Rd 4)
8. Billy Schrauth (70.7, Rd 4)
9. Beau Stephens (66.6, Rd 5)
10. DJ Campbell (66.4, Rd 5)
11. Micah Morris (65.9, Rd 5)
12. Garrett Digiorgio (65.8, Rd 5)
13. Jeremiah Wright (61.7, Rd 6)
14. Evan Beerntsen (60.3, Rd 6)
15. Logan Taylor (60.1, Rd 6)
16. Fernando Carmona (58.9, Rd 7)
17. Alex Harkey (58.4, Rd 7)
18. Dillon Wade (57.8, Rd 7)
19. Joshua Brown (55.6, Rd 7)
20. Ar’Maj Reed-Adams (54.2, UDFA)
21. Febechi Nwaiwu (53.0, UDFA)
Notables Not Graded:
– Daniel King
– Jaeden Roberts
– Caden Barnett
– Josh Gesky
C Rankings:
1. Connor Lew (77.0, Rd 3)
2. Brian Parker (75.4, Rd 3)
3. Logan Jones (73.5, Rd 4)
4. Trey Zuhn (73.4, Rd 4)
5. Sam Hecht (70.5, Rd 4)
6. Parker Brailsford (66.1, Rd 5)
7. Jake Slaughter (65.9, Rd 5)
8. Matt Gulbin (64.8, Rd 6)
9. Pat Coogan (63.2, Rd 6)
10. James Brockmeyer (61.1, Rd 6)
11. Jager Burton (57.8, Rd 7)
Notables Not Graded:
– Delby Lemieux
– Mason Randolph
– Connor Tollison
– Jaren Kump
Thumbnail Image Via: TarheelBornBred (CC)