NFL Draft: OT Rankings
1
Francis Mauigoa
School: Miami
Ht/Wt: 6’6”, 329 lbs
Strengths:
– Built like an interior lineman with the athleticism to play OT.
– Stifles bull rushes. He sets a firm anchor and doesn’t give any ground.
– Quick out of his stance.
– Athletic enough to follow speed rushers around the edge.
– A bulldozer in the run game. Will clear big lanes for the ball carrier.
– Efficient pulling across the line.
– Good enough movement skills to block in space.
– Hand strikes deliver a firm blow.
Weaknesses:
– Quick to mirror rushers around the edge, but lags a little bit when they hit him with the inside counter and he is forced to adjust.
– Length is good but not elite. Matchups that combine speed and length could be an issue at times.
– Technical mistakes quietly creep in from time to time. Instances of leaning or lunging that need to be cut out.
Summary:
Mauigoa is a high end OT prospect who combines elite size and strength with good athleticism. Power rarely phases him, as he can set a firm anchor, even against bigger players. There are moments of domination in the run game. He is a people mover, and makes life a lot easier for the RB. He is athletic enough to handle speed around the edge. The primary hang up I have is just that his feet don’t quite seem to be quick enough to perfectly mirror inside counters. With his frame and strength, it is not like anyone is going through him, but it is one area where there were some blips. His length also isn’t elite. For another prospect, I’m not sure it is even worth mentioning. But for a higher end one, it is a nitpick I’ll throw in. At the end of the day, Mauigoa projects as a high quality starting OT in the NFL. Some like him as a G, and based on his traits, he should be great there too. But a move isn’t necessary.
| Grade: 89.4 | Round Grade: 1st |
2
Spencer Fano
School: Utah
ht/Wt: 6’6”, 311 lbs
Strengths:
– Smooth athlete.
– Quick out of his stance with the agility to mirror speed rushers around the edge.
– Adjusts really well to counter moves. He can slide over to match the rush and snuff it out.
– Footwork is impressive when making these adjustments.
– More than enough speed and agility to block on the move. Not just on pulls. He can really get out there into space.
– Good hand technique.
– High motor player. Plays to the whistle.
Weaknesses:
– He doesn’t get over powered, but also doesn’t overpower anyone. Enough strength to hold his own, but certain matchups can still see him pushed back.
– Same story as a run blocker. Good enough overall, but more of a redirector than a bulldozer.
– Frame is pretty lean for an OT.
– Sometimes gets his pad level too high and loses leverage.
– Despite having the speed and agility to mirror around the edge, there are instances of over setting, lunging, and leaning.
Summary:
Fano is a highly athletic OT prospect who can match anyone around the arc. He is so smooth on his feet, with the agility to not only mirror around the arc, but also perfectly match inside counters to snuff them out. He has enough strength to manage, but he has a lean frame and isn’t, by any means, a power player. Matchups against high end bull rushers will challenge him, to some degree. As well, he isn’t a people mover in the run game. He can hold his own in a phone booth, but is much better on the move. Fano’s high end athleticism gives him a nice ceiling, and I do think his frame has room to fill out. Getting stronger would really take his game up a notch, and he is still pretty solid at this point. There are technical aspects that still need to be cleaned up early on. However, Fano could still potentially start as a rookie. I’d expect growing pains, but he should be able to provide solid play, and continued improvement over time. His ceiling is elite if he can put it all together.
| Grade: 85.2 | Round Grade: 1st |
3
Kaydn Proctor
School: Alabama
Ht/Wt: 6’7”, 352 lbs
Strengths:
– Massive frame and an abundance of power.
– Absorbs contact and stifles power rushes.
– Can move people in the run game.
– Able to latch on and drive his man forward.
– Athleticism is solid enough for competence against speed and the capability to pull across the line.
– Hand strikes are violent.
– Build should allow him to also play G.
Weaknesses:
– Capable athlete, but there are some limitations.
– Speed around the edge will really challenge him.
– Has trouble dealing with inside counters and defenders who try to cross face.
– Capable blocker on the move but it is not his strong suit.
– Technique can get sloppy at times.
– He lunges and leans a lot, rather than keeping a square frame. He opens up gaps for defenders to leak through.
– Takes on contact too often, rather than initiating.
Summary:
Proctor has an abundance of size, strength, and power, which will really appeal to teams. Bull rushes rarely challenge him, and when they do, he can reset and anchor again. He is a people mover in the run game, opening up big lanes. Average athleticism does pose some challenges against speed, and some issues dealing with inside counters where he needs higher end agility to match. As well, technical faults lead to some quick losses on tape. Some of those can be fixed, but he isn’t a perfect all around prospect. He’ll have his limitations, which for me, pushes him down a little. A move to G would help to mitigate them, but the positional value will likely keep him on the outside at OT. Even with some of the issues, he should be an above average starter at OT, with the potential to be an elite G, should a team choose to play him there.
| Grade: 85.0 | Round Grade: 1st |
4
Max Iheanachor
School: Arizona State
Ht/Wt: 6’6”, 321 lbs
Strengths:
– Good combination of size, length, strength, and athleticism.
– Has the movement skills to mirror rushers around the edge.
– Big frame allows him to absorb contact.
– Strong player who can set a firm anchor, allowing no push.
– Power shows up in the run game. He is able to create movement and pave open lanes for the runner.
– Good enough athlete for pulls and blocking in space.
– Length to swing leverage battles in his favour.
– Was one of the best performers at the Senior Bowl.
Weaknesses:
– High pad level sometimes negates some of his natural tools.
– Footwork in his pass sets can get sloppy at times.
– Instances where he stops moving his feet and will lunge at his opponent, leaving him vulnerable.
– Hand technique needs quite a bit of work.
– Relatively new to football and is still learning the nuances of the game.
Summary:
Iheanachor is a high upside prospect with the strength/athleticism combination that can make him a high end starter for a long time. You see the natural strength when he is absorbing contact and stifling bull rushers, or when he is creating significant movement in the run game. Possessing both of those traits, as opposed to one or the other like you see with a lot of prospects, already puts him at an advantage, and bodes well for his chances to start. Iheanachor is still relatively new to football, having started playing in college, and this shows with his technique. There are still some pretty obvious concerns with that, which may lead to questions about his ability to be a plug and play starter. His performance at the Senior Bowl, however, may ease those concerns just a bit. But based on his tape from the season, his footwork and hand technique still need work. The traits, I suppose, could be enough to earn him a spot right away, but I’d expect there to be growing pains. For the lack of experience, his development to this point is pretty impressive, and also suggests that he is a quick learner and is likely to keep the upward trend going. As he makes those improvements, he should be a high end starter.
| Grade: 84.0 | Round Grade: 2nd |
5
Caleb Lomu
School: Utah
Ht/Wt: 6’6”, 313 lbs
Strengths:
– Easy, fluid mover.
– Has no problem pulling across the line.
– Has the agility to mirror rushers around the edge and adjust to any kind of inside counter.
– More than enough speed to get to the second level and reach his benchmarks.
– Decent strength to hold his own against a bull rush.
– Seems to have room to add more mass.
Weaknesses:
– Footwork in his pass sets is extremely inconsistent. There are some plays where he completely abandons it. Almost looks like a speed threat creates some panic, despite him having the athletic ability to deal with it.
– Frame is lean and he is lacking in strength. He can hold his own in pass protection against power, but some matchups will be more difficult.
– Will definitely need to add mass and strength.
– Doesn’t really move people in the run game, more so redirects.
– In addition to poor footwork, he lunges a lot and finds himself out of position.
– Too many bad losses.
– Has the athleticism to block in space, but can take better angles.
Summary:
Lomu is a OT prospect who stands out for his elite athleticism. When on his game, he has shown he can effortlessly mirror speed around the arc, while possessing the agility to reverse course to stop an inside counter. Despite the traits, however, he is still very raw. Lomu will need to get a lot stronger in order to better handle power, both in the passing and running game. Moreover, his technique is extremely unrefined. His footwork can really look bad at times, and he gifts rushers some easy wins. He’ll need some developmental time, but the issues are all fixable, while the athleticism he possesses cannot be taught. With these kinds of players, there is always some risk involved, and that is no different here. The good news is that his frame looks like it has room to handle the extra mass that he’ll need. The hope after that is that he can get a handle on his technique. If he can, he’ll be a high end starter.
| Grade: 80.3 | Round Grade: 2nd |
6
Blake Miller
School: Clemson
Ht/Wt: 6’7”, 317 lbs
Strengths:
– Good athleticism.
– Can hang with speed around the edge.
– Good vertical blocker. Gets to the second level in a hurry.
– Able to pull across the line.
– Slide quickness is good for when he has to react to counter moves or stunts/twists/a late blitz.
– Strength is a little underrated. He isn’t a force, but he generally anchors well when playing with sound technique, and he also can create some movement in the run game.
– Quick out of his stance and looks to initiate contact.
Weaknesses:
– Technique is underdeveloped.
– Footwork can look choppy at times.
– Consistently plays at a high pad level and concedes a lot of leverage as a result.
– Way too many instances of lunging. On some of these, he whiffs completely.
– Hand placement needs work.
– Opponents are able to swipe away his hands and strike his chest.
– Strength is fine but he doesn’t have that high end natural strength that you can convert into power. His effort helps, but he isn’t matchup proof.
Summary:
Miller is an athletic prospect who shows potential in his pass sets and as a run blocker. His motor runs hot, and he gets out of his stance in a flash, initiating contact with his opponent. He can mirror speed rushers and block efficiently in space. Miller is strong enough to combine it with his effort level to generally hold up well against power. But I wouldn’t say he is super physically imposing. He does enough. Miller’s poor hand placement and frequent lunging lead to some bad losses. These will have to be cut out. As well, his footwork will need to be cleaned up. If he can do that and continue to get stronger, Miller can be a good starter at RT. Perhaps he competes for a spot on day 1, but he has enough issues to clean up that he’d probably benefit from some time sitting.
| Grade: 80.0 | Round Grade: 2nd |
7
Monroe Freeling
School: Georgia
Ht/Wt: 6’7”, 315 lbs
Strengths:
– Good overall athleticism for the position with the ability to mirror rushers around the end.
– Has a long reach that can allow him to keep defenders off his chest and swing the leverage in his favour.
– Quick enough feet to make adjustments to counter moves.
– Is a plus blocker in space.
– Enough speed and agility to get to the second level and hit moving targets.
– Decent strength to stop or slow down power rushes.
Weaknesses:
– Has good length, but doesn’t always use it to his advantage.
– Way too much lunging in his pass sets, which savvy defenders can take full advantage of.
– Frame is lean and will need to be filled out.
– Has enough strength to hold his own against power, but he doesn’t dominate and can still be bull rushed by stronger players.
– Footwork is sloppy as he gets out of his stance. Choppy movements slow him down and give speed rushers an opportunity to seize.
– Hand placement and timing is still a work in progress.
– Minimal movement created in the run game. Many of the aforementioned weaknesses factor in here as well, with technique and strength being a required improvement.
– Pad level can get too high.
Summary:
Freeling is an athletic OT with the ability to defend the edge against speed. He has mirroring capabilities and has shown this in flashes. While his strength is solid enough for stalemates, these results are still matchup dependent. Heading into the NFL, he’ll need to fill out his frame and get stronger. Technique is a concern right now. His footwork gets really sloppy, and his hand technique also still has a ways to go. Further, lunges directly led to some quick losses. His athleticism obviously stands out. Additionally, he has good length and a frame that should allow him to get stronger. There is very much a developmental aspect to him as a prospect, but Freeling has quality starter potential if he puts it all together.
| Grade: 77.8 | Round Grade: 3rd |
8
Jude Bowry
School: Boston College
Ht/Wt: 6’5”, 314 lbs
Strengths:
– Great athleticism. He is a real smooth mover.
– More than enough fluidity to mirror speed rushers around the edge.
– Also more than enough for any assignment where he’d have to block in space.
– Gets out of his stance quickly.
– Generally is able to stay square to his opponent.
– Footwork is pretty good.
– Good length.
Weaknesses:
– Will need to get stronger in order to handle NFL power.
– Sometimes allows rushers to strike first, and he gets stunned for a second.
– Pad level gets too high, and rushers are able to get under his pad and push him back.
– Bull rushes give him trouble.
– Good run blocker in space, but he struggles to create movement when blocking in a phone booth.
– Hand timing and placement need improvement.
– Sometimes catches contact rather than initiating it.
Summary:
Bowry is a high upside prospect thanks to his combination of elite athleticism and good length. He might be the smoothest player in this class. The way he can effortlessly make his way around the arc can really make things difficult for speed rushers. Of course, this ability also translates to run blocking in space. Right now, when it comes to power, he falls short. He can have some trouble against bull rushes. This is partially due to bad technique and partially because he has to get stronger. Further, he generates little movement in the run game. Currently, he is a developmental project, and you can see issues that would be regular occurrences if he plays early on. However, the athletic upside is exciting. His technique isn’t so bad that it can’t be worked on. His pad level is the biggest thing. If he can fix that, fix his hand technique, and get stronger, there is high end starter upside here.
| Grade: 75.1 | Round Grade: 3rd |
9
Dametrious Crownover
School: Texas A&M
Ht/Wt: 6’7”, 319 lbs
Strengths:
– Thick build with elite level arm length.
– Reach is able to keep defenders off his chest, swinging leverage battles heavily in his favour.
– Plays with a good amount of power.
– Shows anchor ability.
– Hand strikes generate considerable pop.
– Able to create some movement in the run game.
– Size and length gives him some recovery ability.
Weaknesses:
– Technique can be all over the place.
– Pad level is consistently too high, which allows defenders to get underneath him and push him back into the pocket.
– Footwork in his pass sets looks choppy, and agile speed rushers can bend around him.
– Poor hand placement often makes his strikes ineffective.
– Oversets open up opportunities for inside counters.
– Not super quick on his feet. Perhaps is baseline capable, but blocking in space isn’t his calling card. You see some of the agility issues when he is pass blocking against speed, as well.
Summary:
Crownover has the kind of build you look for in an OT. Tall, long, and sturdy. You see these advantages when he is stifling power rushes or moving people in the run game. That said, he is a developmental project because his technique still has a long way to go. His pad level is too high, too often, his footwork needs cleaning up, and his hand technique leaves a lot to be desired. As far as traits go, I don’t think he is anything special athletically, and there are some lateral limitations that create issues. Fixing his technique can partially mitigate these issues, however. The size, length, and strength are all traits that are worth work. If he puts it all together, there is starter upside. But the range of outcomes seems to be just about anything. You could see him making some improvements and only becoming a swing tackle, and you also see some projects not turn out at all. His drafting team will need to put in the work, and hope they can get to the untapped upside. It will take time, but is worth a shot at some point on day 3.
| Grade: 74.9 | Round Grade: 4th |
10
Keagan Trost
School: MIssouri
Ht/Wt: 6’5”, 311 lbs
Strengths:
– Good build to absorb contact.
– Able to hold up against power rushers.
– Stays square to his opponent to help minimize leaky edges.
– Is able to generate some push in the run game.
– Solid blocker in a phone booth. Decent anchor ability and in the run game, his legs help generate some drive.
– Generally is a technically sound player. Clean footwork in his pass sets, good positioning without much lunging or leaning.
– Can stack a couple of blocks vertically if not required to venture too far from home.
Weaknesses:
– Overager prospect.
– Lacks foot quickness.
– Speed around the edge can challenge him. His technique and strength is enough that he does a respectable job of handling it, but at the next level, there will be additional challenges.
– Lack of lateral mobility also makes it tough to react to inside moves and defenders attempting to cross face.
– Arm length isn’t great, which can make it additionally difficult in certain matchups.
– Instances where his pad level gets a bit high.
– Footwork as a run blocker can be choppy when asked to leave the phone booth.
– Can execute pulls and shorter vertical blocks, but you start to see more of the agility issues the further into space he gets.
Summary:
Trost comes with a good build and enough strength to hold his own against power. Not to say he is perfect, his technique is generally pretty good. He does well to stay square and not give away any freebies. Trost does fall a bit short athletically. It is not disastrous, but speed around the edge does challenge him. Additionally, while he can stack a few blocks vertically, you want to be careful about getting him too far into space. I don’t see any high end traits, but his build and strength are enough that he comes with a decent enough floor. If he can maintain consistency with his technique, Trost will have the chance to be a solid, if unspectacular starter. If not, he still seems to be a good bet to earn a job as a swing tackle, or perhaps even a backup G.
| Grade: 74.8 | Round Grade: 4th |
11
Markel Bell
School: Miami
Ht/Wt: 6’9”, 346 lbs
Strengths:
– Towering frame with elite length. And by elite, I mean ELITE.’
– Surprisingly fluid mover for someone so tall.
– Has enough fluidity to combine with his reach, which allows him to push speed rushers around the bend and out the back door.
– Plays with an abundance of strength and power.
– Stifles bull rushes quite easily, and creates a lot of push in the run game.
– Was solid when asked to pull across the line.
– Generates a lot of pop in his hand strikes.
Weaknesses:
– Fluid for his size, but not perfect.
– I’m not so much worried about speed as I am bend. Bendy players are able to turn the corner on him, or sometimes swipe his hands and get him with the counter.
– Wouldn’t rely on him consistently to get vertically to the second level for blocks.
– Pad level gets high at times, which sometimes negates his strength advantage (on a good note, this didn’t happen as often as I would have expected for his size).
– Inconsistent mirror ability.
Summary:
Bell is a mammoth of a man, with a ton of length to work with. His size naturally absorbs contact and power, while his arm length makes it tough for some players to even engage. He is decently fluid for his size and, using his length, is able to guide speed rushers out the back door. Of course, perfection should not be expected. Bendy players in particular are what give him the most trouble. Both in terms of getting around the edge and winning with inside counters. In the run game, he is best left close to home, but can also pull across the line. While he is a good athlete for his size, blocking down the field is pushing it a little. While there are some weaknesses to his game that you can’t really do anything about, Bell has natural tools that can help offset them. Some matchups will be tougher than others, but with some technical refinement, he has starter upside.
| Grade: 74.2 | Round Grade: 4th |
12
Caleb Tiernan
School: Northwestern
Ht/Wt: 6’8”, 323 lbs
Strengths:
– Baseline strength to hold his own against bull rushes.
– Well built frame that absorbs contact.
– Capable enough athlete for scheme versatility.
– Can block in space and is able to redirect when in a phone booth.
– Decent amount of force in his hand strikes.
Weaknesses:
– Doesn’t have any elite traits.
– Is decent against power, but he is the one on the defensive. Isn’t always the one to “win” the rep.
– Capable athlete, but it is closer to average.
– Can block in space, but it is not his calling card.
– Capable against speed, but is not footproof. Will certainly face his challenges.
– Lacks length to swing leverage in his favour. Also doesn’t help that he plays at a high pad level too often.
– Lunges or oversets too often.
– Footwork can get a bit sloppy at times.
Summary:
Solid and decent are the common denominators of a lot here. Strength/power, athleticism/movements skills etc. He is capable in most areas, but isn’t really a dominant player, and has to work much harder for his wins. There are a lot of stalemates scattered throughout his tape. While this obviously limits his ceiling, it also gives him the chance to be a solid, if unspectacular starter. The thing right now is that there are also some technical aspects that need work. His pad level, lunging, leaning, footwork etc. Right now, he is probably a swing tackle projection. Someone who is reliable enough to be a good backup. But to cross the starter threshold, the technical improvements will have to be made.
| Grade: 73.6 | Round Grade: 4th |
13
Diego Pounds
School: Ole Miss
Ht/Wt: 6’6”, 325 lbs
Strengths:
– Towering frame with a long reach and solid build.
– Has the frame to absorb contact.
– When technique is on point, he can handedly stifle bull rushes. Strength makes it tough to get by him, but his long reach sometimes makes it tough for his opponent to even get started.
– Hand strikes pack some power.
– Able to create movement in the run game.
Weaknesses:
– Technique is sloppy in multiple areas.
– Pad level gets way too high and tanks his balance. Rushers are able to knock him back.
– Foot quickness isn’t the best, and you see oversets as he tries to compensate for speed. This leads to some easy wins on counter moves for his opponent.
– Balance issue also shows up in his run blocking, as it stops him from getting as much power and sustain into his blocks as he could.
– Hand placement and timing need work.
Summary:
Pounds shows some flashes on tape thanks to his abundance of strength and long arms. At his best, he is stifling bull rushes, using his length to keep angles wide, and paving lanes in the run game. However, he also has agility limitations, which caused some issues against speed rushers. These issues were then exacerbated by his attempt to compensate, which just resulted in oversets and quick losses to an inside move. His high pad level and poor balance shows up in both phases, and will have to be removed from his game. The high points show someone who can potentially be a starter, but right now he is a developmental project. There is a lot to work on, and those issues are in addition to athletic limitations. It will take a lot to get to that starter level, but he could, more quickly, develop into a solid swing tackle.
| Grade: 68.6 | Round Grade: 5th |
14
Kage Casey
School: Boise State
Ht/Wt: 6’5”, 310 lbs
Strengths:
– Good build and good strength to handle power.
– Anchors well against bull rushes.
– Plays a clean technical game. Footwork and hand technique both hold up.
– Creates some push in the run game.
– Decent enough athleticism for work on the move.
Weaknesses:
– Lack of length is his biggest issue.
– Creates early push in the run game, but his lack of length allows defenders to get off the block and make a play on the ball carrier.
– Athletically, he is capable, but his athleticism is not high end.
– Speed rushers will still give him some trouble.
– Capable blocker on the move, but far from perfect.
Summary:
Casey is a solid, but unspectacular prospect. He brings good enough strength to the table to handle power and create some push in the run game. However, his lack of length makes it a bit tough to consistently sustain his blocks. His athleticism allows him to be scheme versatile, but it is about average. Twitchier players will certainly give him trouble, and he isn’t perfect on the move. Casey does play with clean technique and is a high IQ player. This, along with his baseline strength, should allow him to be a good swing tackle, with low end starter potential.
| Grade: 66.7 | Round Grade: 5th |
15
Travis Burke
School: Memphis
Ht/Wt: 6’9”, 325 lbs
Strengths:
– Towering frame with good length.
– Good strength to match up against power rushers.
– Frame absorbs contact well.
– Hand strikes are heavy and effective.
– Looks for work and will play through the whistle.
– High effort player.
– Able to create some push in the run game.
Weaknesses:
– Tall frame is a blessing and curse. It has its benefits, but also results in leggy movements.
– He has trouble mirroring speed around the arc.
– Bendy players can flip him inside out.
– Not great as a blocker on the move. Struggles to reach his benchmarks.
– Gets his pad level too high, too often. Takes away from his natural strength, as rushers get underneath and can push him backwards.
– Oversets lead to quick wins for the pass rusher.
Summary:
Burke has a tall frame and good length. You see the benefit of these tools when he is stifling a power rush or using his length to keep opponents from fully engaging. However, you also see the downside in his limited mobility, which opens up opportunities for speed rushers. A lot of these aspects will always remain in his game, but improving his pad level could really help his consistency. This would help prevent losses against players that, on paper, he should match up well against. He needs development, but with some work, Burke could become a solid swing tackle, despite some of his limitations.
| Grade: 61.4 | Round Grade: 6th |
16
Carver Willis
School: Washington
Ht/Wt: 6’5”, 303 lbs
Strengths:
– Smooth athlete with good speed and quickness.
– Pulls are very good. Gets out of his stance quickly and has the speed to cross the line in time to seal the edge.
– Also blocks well upfield. Has the speed to get to the second level and the agility to hit moving targets.
– Has the ability to mirror speed around the edge.
– High motor player who will work to fend off power.
Weaknesses:
– Arm length falls below standard for OT.
– Frame is on the lean side.
– Strength is passable for OT, but more of a concern for G. But on the other hand, length is okay for G, but less so for OT. A bit of a conundrum here.
– Works hard to fend off power, but the success rate can vary game by game.
– Sometimes oversets and gives up a quick win.
– Firm hand strikes knock him back a little bit.
Summary:
Willis is a good athlete, whose speed and fluidity really shine when he is blocking in space. His high effort level adds to the experience. He has enough to handle speed rushers, but power rushers with length take advantage of his leaner frame and shorter arms. The leverage battle often favours his opponent, and he has to work hard just to stalemate. The arm measurements would have some moving him inside to G, but I’m not sure he has the power to hold up there. If he isn’t a natural fit at either position, perhaps his ceiling is a good backup at both positions. He’ll have to prove he can be versatile enough. Even if he tops out as a backup or swing player, Willis brings enough to the table that he can earn a top backup job in the NFL. His character and effort level will help him, but his movement skills are what will do most of the talking.
| Grade: 61.2 | Round Grade: 6th |
17
JC Davis
School: Illinois
Ht/Wt: 6’4”, 322 lbs
Strengths:
– Frame is sturdy and well built.
– Very good length to help in leverage battles.
– Able to stifle bull rushes. Has the strength to match with power.
– Gets good forward drive from his legs and will move people in the run game.
– Smooth footwork in shallower pass sets.
Weaknesses:
– Athleticism doesn’t make the mark.
– Had a lot of shallow sets, but when he was taken wide round the arc by speed, you could see the limitations.
– Compensated for lack of agility by abandoning technique and sloppy footwork.
– Hand placement needs work, and in college, this cost him his sustain on a lot of plays.
– Allowed his opponent to strike his chest when hand placement was off.
– Will need to fix technical issues in order to sustain blocks more consistently.
– Overextensions opened up inside counter opportunities for the rusher.
Summary:
Davis doesn’t stand out athletically, but has enough size and strength, along with a large wingspan, to still hold his own in most games. Wider pass sets can cause him trouble, where speed and bend expose his limitations. However, in shallower sets, his footwork was pretty decent, and you could see the power that he brings in both phases. A high pad level and bad hand technique still cause him issues, but the will be that he cleans that stuff up. In a power scheme, Davis would have a chance to become a swing tackle or possibly a low end starter. This is because his tools are solid enough for work in a phone booth. I don’t like him as much in space, but his power and length will get him a look.
| Grade: 60.8 | Round Grade: 6th |
18
Enrique Cruz
School: Kansas
Ht/Wt: 6’6”, 313 lbs
Strengths:
– Shows flashes of power.
– Decent enough athleticism to hold his own against speed.
– Frame is big and can absorb some contact.
– Good length.
– High effort player.
– Head is always on a swivel and he looks for work when he can.
Weaknesses:
– Is a decent athlete, but his movements sometimes look segmented.
– Definitely would say that his athleticism does not match the combine numbers.
– A lot of quick losses show up on tape.
– His strength and power show up in flashes, but he struggles to assert dominance.
– His pad level gets high and hand placement can be off. Hurts his ability to latch on and sustain blocks through the play.
– A lot of plays where he struggles to generate power, despite flashes.
– Doesn’t consistently anchor.
– The issues show up as a pass and run blocker.
Summary:
Cruz has good size, baseline athleticism, and baseline strength that give him a chance to make it at the next level. However, right now, his technique needs work and he consistently struggles to show the power that momentary flashes seem to suggest he possesses. I was impressed with his awareness and effort that he consistently displayed. His head was always on a swivel, and he was already ready to lend a hand whenever he was able to. Cruz has the demeanour to play the position, and decent enough traits to work around. His ceiling is probably a swing tackle, but there seems to be enough for a potential late round pick.
| Grade: 57.6 | Round Grade: 7th |
19
Austin Barber
School: Florida
Ht/Wt: 6’7”, 318 lbs
Strengths:
– Decent enough strength to hold his own against power.
– Able to generate some drive as a run blocker.
– As a run blocker, he stays square and centred, which helps him maximize his power and limit mistakes.
– Will battle throughout the rep to keep near losses from tipping over the edge.
– Big frame is able to absorb some contact.
– Hand strikes have some pop.
– Footwork is calm and clean.
Weaknesses:
– Lacking standout physical traits.
– Enough strength to manage, but players with decent strength will give him a challenge, while the higher end power rushers can really take advantage.
– Athleticism is sub par.
– Slow getting into space when blocking on the move.
– Has trouble dealing with speed rushers.
– Hand technique needs work. Strikes are often inaccurate, which leaves him out of position.
– Oversets open up inside counter opportunities for his opponent.
Summary:
Barber has his solid moments, led by functional physical traits and enough effort to sometimes prop them up a little more. He struggles against high end talent, but can otherwise hold his own. He has up and down performances, based on the matchup, but has enough baseline strength and size to stick around in the league. However, he lacks the required athleticism and is only middling when it comes to strength, making his probable ceiling that of a swing tackle. And development will be needed to get to that point.
| Grade: 55.7 | Round Grade: 7th |
20
Isaiah World
School: Oregon
Ht/Wt: 6’6”, 323 lbs
Strengths:
– Good build and good length.
– Shows flashes of power in both phases.
– Hand strikes are heavy.
– Enough length to push speed rushers out the back door.
– Capable enough athlete to pull across the line.
Weaknesses:
– Coming off a torn ACL.
– Lacks the foot quickness to consistently execute blocks in space.
– Also lacks agility to defend against athletic pass rushers.
– Athleticism concern is exacerbated by sloppy footwork.
– Abandons technique when he feels threatened.
– High pad level takes away leverage and negates some of the power he would otherwise be able to bring to the table.
– Oversets leave him vulnerable to inside moves.
Summary:
World has a well built frame that comes with good length. He has good enough strength to be taken seriously by bull rushers. Anchoring ability is there, and he has also flashed the ability to create forward movement in the run game. However, athletic limitations put a cap on his ceiling. Additionally, poor footwork and a high pad level helped contribute to some quick losses. If he can improve some of the technical aspects, World has the chance to become a fine backup.
| Grade: 55.0 | Round Grade: 7th |
21
Drew Shelton
School: Penn State
Ht/Wt: 6’5”, 313 lbs
Strengths:
– Decent athleticism.
– Flashes the ability to mirror around the edge.
– Able to pull across the line.
– Can get to the second level and hit moving targets.
– Flashes recovery ability when beaten.
– Decent enough length.
Weaknesses:
– Strength is below average.
– Struggles to sustain blocks.
– Hand strikes lack pop.
– Footwork is extremely choppy.
– Despite athleticism, speed rushers are able to beat him around the bend.
– Gets twisted around easily and cross facing rushers get quick wins on him.
– Lacks sustain in the run game.
Summary:
Shelton is a developmental project who is a long way from being ready to see the field at the NFL level. His athleticism and length are tools that you can work around. As well, his frame is tall and seems like it could hold a little more mass, as he gets stronger. But right now, his strength is below average, and he struggles to sustain blocks, both in the pass and run game. Additionally, technical issues show up in abundance, from awful footwork to poor hand technique. There are enough traits that he might get a look late in the draft, but a lot of work will be needed for him to reach his full potential.
| Grade: 54.3 | Round Grade: UDFA |
22
Fa’alili Fa’amoe
School: Wake Forest
Ht/Wt: 6’5”, 311 lbs
Strengths:
– Gets a decent amount of pop in his hand strikes.
– Placement of his hands is generally pretty good as well.
– Shows some straight line speed when pulling across the line or moving vertically to stack blocks upfield.
– Flashes anchoring ability.
– Experience at RT and LT.
Weaknesses:
– Lateral mobility does not match his straight line speed.
– Sluggish and off balance when getting into his kick slide.
– Poor footwork leads to quick losses to speed rushers.
– Lunges and whiffs on his blocks, also leading to quick wins for his opponent.
– Has the speed to get upfield but lacks the lateral agility to hit moving targets. Better off blocking close to home.
– Will latch on, but struggle to stay connected to his blocks.
– Doesn’t create a lot of push in the run game.
– High pad level contributes to inability to sustain blocks.
– Penalties an issue.
– Lacks length.
Summary:
Fa’amoe comes with a decent build and has shown flashes of playing with power. His best feature seems to be his hand technique. Placement and timing are both quite good, and his strikes generate a considerable amount of force, knocking his opponent off kilter a little bit. His straight line speed is good, which shows on pulls and blocking assignments in space further up the field. However, he lacks the agility to land blocks on targets who are actively looking to avoid him. His pass sets are also limited because he lacks the agility to mirror speed around the edge. Flashes of power show up, but a high pad level leads to more instances where he is either being pushed back or cleanly beaten by a rush move. Right now, he gives up too many quick wins to his opponent. He is a project with some traits that might be enough for him to make it in the league. His ceiling, however, seems to be that of a backup.
| Grade: 54.0 | Round Grade: UDFA |
23
Ryan Mosesso
School: UMass Amherst
Ht/Wt: 6’4”, 300 lbs
Strengths:
– A solid athlete.
– Shown to be capable of mirroring rushers around the arc.
– Has the movement skills to block in space and hit his moving targets.
– Decent build.
– Has shown capabilities when it comes to handling power.
Weaknesses:
– Small school prospect who will face a big jump when entering the NFL.
– Technique needs work in several areas.
– Despite good athleticism, he abandons footwork at the first sign of a defender threatening the end. He’ll almost be running backwards.
– Hand technique needs work.
– Body control and balance have been issues.
– Latches onto his blocks, but struggles to sustain all the way through the whistle.
Summary:
Mosesso is a small school prospect who will be facing a significant jump in competition in the NFL, once he gets there. His athleticism is the biggest draw here, as he is a solid blocker in space, and has baseline capabilities to handle speed. Still, in addition to the competition jump, which will be a tough transition, he also has issues which include just sustaining his blocks. Mosesso has a lot to work on, and isn’t close to being ready to see the field. However, if a team likes his athleticism, perhaps they use a late round pick. Additionally, he has the kind of frame that can hold more mass. There is some upside here to tap into, but his team will need to invest a lot of time. Likely multiple years on the practice squad.
| Grade: 48.8 | Round Grade: UDFA |
OT Rankings:
1. Francis Mauigoa (89.4, Rd 1)
2. Spencer Fano (85.2, Rd 1)
3. Kaydn Proctor (85.0, Rd 1)
4. Max Iheanachor (84.0, Rd 2)
5. Caleb Lomu (80.3, Rd 2)
6. Blake Miller (80.0, Rd 2)
7. Monroe Freeling (77.8, Rd 3)
8. Jude Bowry (75.1, Rd 3)
9. Dametrious Crownover (74.9, Rd 4)
10. Keagan Trost (74.8, Rd 4)
11. Markel Bell (74.2, Rd 4)
12. Caleb Tiernan (73.6, Rd 4)
13. Diego Pounds (68.6, Rd 5)
14. Kage Casey (66.7, Rd 5)
15. Travis Burke (61.4, Rd 6)
16. Carver Willis (61.2, Rd 6)
17. JC Davis (60.8, Rd 6)
18. Enrique Cruz (57.6, Rd 7)
19. Austin Barber (55.7, Rd 7)
20. Isaiah World (55.0, Rd 7)
21. Drew Shelton (54.3, UDFA)
22. Fa’alili Fa’amoe (54.0, UDFA)
23. Ryan Mosesso (48.8, UDFA)
Notables Not Graded:
– Nolan Rucci
– Alan Herron
– Jayden Williams
– Aamil Wagner
– Micah Pettus
– Riley Mahlman
– Tristan Leigh
– Chris Adams
