NFL Draft 2020 "Who's Screwed" Recap of Needs Based Draft

The NFL's Virtual Draft was undeniably a huge success.  Their joint effort with Four Letter Network could be just want we needed as a country to turn the corner and start looking forward to a prudent, gradual return to normalcy over the next few months.  

The league had a great weekend but how about your favorite team?  While you were reading some pre-draft takes about who your team should take, the cool kids were reading THIS blog to understand how the supply and demand forces were working for or against their squad.  Why don't you go and catch up...we'll wait:

1. Pre-Draft Needs Analysis  
2. Day 1 Review of Needs Addressed - Which teams have a lot of day 2 work to do?
3. Day 2 Review - Peek into Day 3

The Short Story

(1) NYJ were the only team to draft all their "needs" in the "sweet spot" of the draft, (2) they were joined by HOU, CLE, DET and MIN as teams to obtain all "need" positions, and (3) WAS extracted the most value out of their picks over the "sweet spot" of the draft.

The Long Story

The Magic of One-Six-Oh

For those of you too lazy to go over the "Who's Screwed" series for 2020, here's a brief overview - based on NFL.Com's team needs and player grades, I tracked the selection of each team's needs over the first 160 picks.  Why 160?  Each team's needs were ranked from 1 (lowest priority) to 5 (highest priority) so if each team attempted to draft simply for "need" everyone would pick their guys in the first 160 picks (32 teams times 5 position needs = 160 selections). This exercise examines only player needs in "deficit positions" (see, you should have read the other articles) based on supply and demand.  If there were 5 Top 160 LBs based on the NFL.com ratings and your team was one of 10 teams with LB needs, there would be a -50% rated deficit at that position, meaning half of us were not going to get a top graded LB.  The number is adjusted based on the talent pool of available players.

With that foundation laid, let's take a look at:

1. Which teams went about their business with a clearly "needs" based strategy given their efforts to complete draft their position needs on Day 3/pre and post pick 160 activity.
2. Which teams benefited and suffered as a result of drafting "need" positions after the sweet spot of the top 160.
3. Analysis of which teams got the most value out of their picks and which ones appeared to reach a bit too far. 

1.  What About MY Needs?!?

If you read the other blog posts, you are familiar with the table above.  On the Left, are each NFL team.  The next three columns, Day 1 Picks/Need, Day 2 Picks/Need and Day 3 Top 160 Picks/Need represent the positions selected by each team and what, if any, need that pick fulfilled. If the pick did not satisfy a NFL.com identified team need, than the designation was "0" as in "WR-0".

• NYJ in the first row picked an offensive tackle in the first round, satisfying their #3 need, which was considered the mid point of the urgency scale per NFL. com.
• Below them, CLE also picked an OT which was their top priority as a #5.

The second column reports the same information through Day 2.  If you were a loyal follower, you would have known after the first and second days, I provided a table updating the adjusted supply and demand ranking per position which would take into account the average grade for each position based on the remaining players.

The third column lists the "need" players selected up to the 160th pick (based on the assumption detailed above) for each team.  The center section titled "Post Top 160 Unfilled Needs" reflects which "need' positions were not filled; it uses the 1-5 scale to indicate priority.  During the draft, "deficit needs" were tracked because if there is a short suppy of a position, it is better to get him sooner than later. 

The final column, "Needs Drafted %" shows what percentage of their "need" positions each team was able to acquire in the Top 160 picks.

Comments:

• Top Gun - NYJ were the only team to fulfill all their "needs" in the top 160 sweet spot resulting in a 100% rating. 
• Montagues and Capulets - The NFC North is pretty clearly not a "needs-based" drafting division, given when you're talking about GB and CHI.  Both clearly ignored all perceived needs - since each picked up only their top "needs", they each scored 33%.  (Top Need in this case is 5 (sum of their drafted needs) divided by all needs summed for a total of 15; 3/15= 33%)
• Comeback Kid  - PHI was in pretty bad shape going into Day 3 with a pretty bleak projection grade for completing their "needs". They turned it around and ended up with an 87% completion rate.
• From the Penthouse to the Outhouse - The team I had graded out as having a "Foolproof" Day 3 draft must have come across some fools because LAC could not convert their two remaining Top 160 picks into their two lowest priority deficit "needs".  They dropped all the way from 1st going into day 3 to 24th.     

2. Value Proposition

Of course, the concept of the Top 160 being the sweet spot of the draft may not exist in the world of NFL GMs.  For them, simply addressing as many of your needs over the course of the draft may be the goal.  So looking at the entire draft, the table below depicts selections from the 161st pick to the final pick.

Post 160 Value - This is a measure calculated to determine how much value a team gained or lost on a "need" position picked after the 160th pick.  To keep it simple, if you compare the grade of the player selected post 160 to the last player of the same position group selected before 160, we determine if there was value gained or lost.
For example:  CIN selected OL Adeniji at #180 when interior line was a priority deficit "need" for the draft.  The last OL selected before the 160th pick was found to have a rating that is 7% higher than the new Bengal.  So, in waiting to draft their "need" OL after 160, they lost 7% of potential talent on that position.  (Of course the opportunity value is not considered here but that is for another article. Let's keep it simple for now).  Teams with blacked out sections did not draft any "needs" players after the first 160 selections.

• HOU, CLE, DET and MIN join NYJ as teams that checked off all their positional "needs" by the end of the draft.  The 
• NYJ is listed first because they addressed all "needs" within the Top 160 picks.
• HOU is second as they were able to generate 5% additional value on their picks despite drafting "needs" positions outside of the Top 160.
• MIN also covered 100% of its "needs" but they had some run off in value from waiting so long to pick up their final players, especially Safety which was the most depleted position going into Day 2.
• The only team to come in with less than a 50% Total Needs Drafted rating would be NE which has historically not shown signs of following any "needs" based draft.  
• GB had the largest drop off in value of post 160 "needs' players drafted, losing 47% in player value by waiting so late.
• If there is a team that, in reality, didn't have a lot of urgent "needs" it is NO but they lost a lot of value waiting to take a QB near the end of the seventh round.  Instead of taking a flyer on a CB they picked up a QB at 240 that may very well have been available as an UDFA.  (And with Hill and the acquisition of Winston, their #240 QB may likely be headed for the practice squad at best.)

3.  The Best Value Award goes too...

The table below shows the value each team got from their overall draft based on the draft position of players and their perceived value (based on NFL.com grades).

Comments:

• Snore Act - The old saying tells us to be hot or cold but not lukewarm. SF, IND and LVR hovered around the average mark - pretty lukewarm.  But when you look at the players they got, there are some gems so perhaps it's more telling about the teams drafting above them. 
• Nothing Up Their Sleeve - WAS pulled a magic act. They came in with picks that, in aggregate, would earn you an "F" grade in school (a 58%) but ended up getting huge value from their picks.
• I Couldn't Tell You - GB had great average picks (86.6%) but ended up near the bottom of the list in terms of perceived value.  I'm sure the front office has a plan but based on these numbers, it's not very clear what that plan is.  You know what that means...we have your Super Bowl winners! 
• Beyond Your Understanding - There is one certainty:  NE continues to not give a crap about what we think of their draft strategy. They don't draft for need, they don't draft for value.  They let Belichik's dog draft.  Guarantied, they play GB in the big game.
• The Value Players - The following teams were above average for value drafting yet left "needs" unfilled indicating they lean toward a BPA/Value approach:
• WAS: 1st in Value, 28th in Needs.
• ARI: 2nd in Value, 29th in Needs
• BUF: 3rd in Value, 30th in Needs
• Other Value over Needs teams:  CHI, NO and SEA.

Final Thoughts

Despite the challenges, it was a great draft with lots of surprises.  No doubt we will be discovering the impact of each pick on the league for years to come.  Keep in mind, the rankings above are wholly subjective, that is, their basis is the NFL.com player rankings which is as arbitrary as any other ranking system.  Regardless of the approach, and regardless of how great a team's draft is declared by the draftniks, what cannot be measured right now is how may difference makers were selected and will their coaching staff be able to adequately motivate to bring out their best.  Looking forward to Draft 2021!

**************************************************************

The Fourth Annual All-Social Media Top 100 List for NFL Draft prospects is posted...check it out here!  Who did your favorite DraftTwitter football fanatics select?  

Find out here!  https://boombearfootball.blogspot.com/2020/04/boombearjrs-fourth-annual-all-social_22.html

NFL Draft - Who's Screwed Update - Day 2 Tables

Never to Late for Football!

For those of you familiar with this page, every year I track team needs vs. likely supply and demand for each position in the NFL Draft.  This is not only fun but it reveals a lot about how each team approached the draft.  In a nutshell, I give a numerical representation of how likely each team will achieve its draft goals based on filling needs.  Assuming the top 5 needs for each team  (according to NFL.com) our exercise looks at how each team pursues the Top 160 players (top 5 needs for each team times 32 teams)  based on the player rankings (also from NFL.com).  The higher the number, the more likely a team will cover all their needs with the most highly grade players.  (I'm tired but for more on the methodology, check out the Day 1 article here.

I won't reveal what time it was when I finally finished the tables, but here they are!

• Nearly Foolproof - LAC despite having no Day 2 picks really cleaned up on Day 1, picking up their highest rated need (a 5 rating) and later their middle need (rated 3).  Their remaining needs are low priority (a 1 and a 2) which are not horrible in terms of Position Deficit (which takes into the number of Top 160 players at that position who are still available and factors in their player grade to further adjust for value.  Their 2nd highest priority is for OT of which there are more options than chasers at this point in the draft.  Would not be surprised if they pick up anyone of the highest graded options in  the Prince, Charles or Bartch.  
• No one can Mail It In - Yeah, usually there would be teams here who have most of their boxes checked and may have a mid priority Position Deficit selection to make but none of those this year.  Granted things are different this year but you always expect parity.  Not this year. 
• Gut Check Time - Someone has to draft the difference makers out there and if the cards fall right, any one of these teams could end up with a solid draft.
• At This Point, Start Drinking -  Four teams in this group, PIT, WAS, NE and KC have not yet addressed their top priority position and, as you will see, the number and quality of players remaining has dwindled.  Not good.
• Aight, Imma Head Out... In this category, we see teams that usually do not have enough draft capital to fill their draft needs in the first 160 picks.  They have 1 pick up to that point, but have three and even four need positions.  And they can be higher priority. 
• Completely Screwed - What if they league held a draft but you had no picks?  These teams just flat out have no draft capital left in the top 160 picks and some teams are completely out of picks, typically in trades for veterans.  
• Tampa Bay was in FIRST position in the pre-draft analysis and now they are in the Completely Screwed category if they want to fill out their needs with Top 160 players...what happened?  (Article for another time.)

Data Tables

The table below reflects the supply and demand via a "Surplus/-Shortage" number which is then used to calculate the Position Certainty which combines player group rankings with the supply/demand data.  The 3 day trend is on the right.

The master table below breaks out each team's draft and provides my Day 3 forecast on how likely the team will hit their numbers.

In closing, I'm not saying players after the 160 pick are to be discounted.   They are critical components of every NFL team.  This exercise is more valuable in examining how teams run their drafts.  Any questions, please leave a comment.

Prior NFL 2020 Draft Who's Screwed Articles - Check them out!

Day One Preview

Day One Review

***************************************************************

The Fourth Annual All-Social Media Top 100 List for NFL Draft prospects is posted...check it out here!  Who did your favorite DraftTwitter football fanatics select?  

Find out here!  https://boombearfootball.blogspot.com/2020/04/boombearjrs-fourth-annual-all-social_22.html

NFL Draft: Who's Screwed? The Impact of Day 1

Getting Ready for Day 2!

NFL had a pretty good draft despite the Safer at Home orders in place nationwide.  There were no  Earth shattering technical glitches I saw but there's always today!


I rolled out the annual review of the teams that were best and worst positioned to fill their needs and, of course, as the selections come off the board, that immediately impacts all teams future plans.  Here is the update based on which players came off the board and the draft capital moved around in trades.

The details of the process can be read here in the pre-draft analysis of the exercise.  Below I list each team with their "Criticality" score... negative 25% was the mean; the higher the number the better shot the team has at filling all their draft "needs".   Here is how it all shook out.

 Short Update

Screwing this Up will be a Feat

• LAC knocked the cover off the ball in terms of filling needs. Picked up their top need in QB Herbert and scooped their 3rd biggest need in LB Kenneth Murray.  Their two critical needs are both low priority, their other need at OL is a rich position and the Bolts have just enough Top 160 picks to cover  (2 for 2).    One issue is they don't have any Day 2 pick.  Regardless, this should be a lay up if they let the draft come to them.

Can Mail it In

• Both teams took care of their top needs and still have plenty of ammo to deal with their respective single critical needs (JAX has 6 picks in the top 160 while DET has 5).  The only downside is their common position of need (OL) is the highest deficit position because of a shortage compared to need and the need is the lowest graded position group in the draft. 

Only the Strong will Survive

• Coin toss here for the teams in this group comprised of clubs who took care of their top needs but have needs at deficit positions with poor draft spots left.  Also in the group are teams with high picks remaining in the Top 160 selections, but those picks may be too few to land many critical positions (DA  BEARS!).  GMs who come out on top here will have earned their bones.

Start Praying to Your Personal God

• I hate to call anything a lost cause but this will be tough. Teams here have at least 3 critical needs with little room for error since they don't have many top 160 picks left (and many teams who traded away their Day 1 picks are in this group so I hope the guy they got is a stud).  Another setback was drafting a guy who didn't fit a position need.  You can't knock a team getting a stud (WAS with Chase Young) but destabilizing your franchise for a question mark leads to lots of head scratching.  GB trading up to take a polarizing QB in the 1st round, which was not a position of need, with a franchise QB under contract or SEA getting a LB which is not a position of need according to NFL.com who was not even a consensus first round pick,  are make or break moves.

Aight...I'mma Head Out

• No one can claim going out and picking up "Swiss Army Knife" Isaiah Simmons or Can't Miss Javon Kinlaw would be considered a "bad draft move".  However if you consider Simmons a Safety (like I do) than they missed out on a need.  Having 4 Critical Needs and 3 remaining picks in the Top 160 (especially at the lower graded positions) won't help.  SF picked up Kinlaw and Aiyuk, satisfying their biggest and middle needed positions so they are already ahead of the game however, they lack the fire power to fill their needs with the best remaining rated players since they have only 1 Top 160 pick left with none on Day 2. Both these teams started out solid and so we can only hope their scouting department have already located  all the uncovered gems deep in the draft.

The Details 

Supply/Demand Table

Safe to say there should be a Day 2 run on Defensive Linemen (even Position Certainty), Running Backs (17% favorable) and WR (30% favorable).

Criticality Table by Draft Order

Criticality Table by Criticality Score

See you tomorrow for the Day 2 review/Day 3 forecast!

***************************************************************

The Fourth Annual All-Social Media Top 100 List for NFL Draft prospects is posted...check it out here!  https://boombearfootball.blogspot.com/2020/04/boombearjrs-fourth-annual-all-social_22.html

Who's Screwed? Which Teams are in the Best Position to Improve in NFL Draft 2020?

The Most Wonderful Time of Year

It's Draft Day!  Just like we have the last two years, this space will take a look at which teams have the best shot to fill the most glaring holes in their rosters.  How will we do that? Glad you asked!

1. Determining Need - Easy enough!  Looking at the NFL.com analysis of top five needs for each team gives us our first set of data.  The needs are rated from "5" for most critical to "1" for least critical position need.
2. Determining the Value of Each Position - Also sourcing NFL.com, we use their player grades to determine the Average Value of each position. Since we are looking at the top 5 needs for 32 teams, our prospects to fill the team needs are the 160 highest graded players according to NFL.com.
3. Critical Positions - Even if a position group has a large percentage of highly rated players, if the demand outstrips the supply, your team might be out of luck.  So we note the number of players for each position group in the top 160 and compare to the number needed by the NFL teams (see Section 1, above) to find if there is a surplus or deficit for each position. 
4. Draft Picks - The number of picks a team has in the first 160 selections in relation to the number of Critical Positions of high need is the crux of this exercise.

With this information determined, we move on to the next steps.

Supply and Demand

• Offensive Tackles are the most plentiful in terms of filling a need with a top 160 player. There are 15 of them in our range (per NFL.com's ratings) and 5 teams have them as a top 5 need. 
• Interestingly, Interior Offensive Line  (on NFL.com, OL is considered G and C) is on the other side of the spectrum with only 15 Top 160 players to fill 29 holes. 
• ADP - Assumes the players' rankings based of NFL.com grades to set Average Draft Position for the player position groups.   Quarterbacks as a group have the best ADP of 52.1 while IOL show up as worst with ADP of 102.9. 
• NFL.com Grade represents the average position grade for the players in each position group and the number on the right of the column is the grade based on the distribution of scores assuming "100" for the best and 70 for the mean (just like school).   
• The prior two items are ranked in the last two columns with 1 being best and 11 as the bottom.

Deficit Position Table and Criticality

This table shows the supply/demand info based on the order of each team's 1st pick in the Draft and Criticality Rank.

What is Criticality?  Although displayed differently in the past, Criticality is a function of the factors discussed above:  Player value, team needs and the number and position of each team draft picks in reference to the critical nature of a position given supply/demand shortage or surplus.   The higher the percentage the better.  APP is the representation of the Deficit Rate at the position of need and the urgency of all team needs based on the NFL.com's "5" is most critical/ "1" is least critical" rating system.

By Criticality

Looking at this sorted by Criticality, we see:

• TB would have to have a hacking event in order to blow this draft.
• Their needs at Deficit Positions are the lowest priority - Quarterback is a "2" and Safety is a "1".  The other three positions of need are surplus positions, DL (+6.3%), RB (+18.2%) and OT (a whopping +220%).   And with 2 Deficit Position needs and 5 picks in the Top 160, it would take a lot of work for them to collapse. As such we have a criticality score of 1,534% above the average.
• Arizona on the other hand, is going to need a lot of luck.  Sure, they have 4 top 160 picks and 4 Deficit Position needs, but the deficits are among the highest positions and the one Surplus Position (DL) is the weakest at 6.3%.    Their average pick is 81.25, below average, which doesn't help matters.  Their Criticality is at the bottom end with -66%.

Based on the above, going into Day 1 of the Draft, TB, CLE, NYJ, NYG and LAC have strong advantages followed by MIA, LVR, IND and LAR as teams with a shot to make it work since they have positive Criticality. 

Everyone else with a negative number is starting at a disadvantage. But the good news is these numbers will fluctuate over the three day event. 

So, I will update these numbers each night so we can find out who's screwed going into each new day of the NFL Draft.

Come back for the updates and check out the above list sorted based on Draft order, below. WAS has the 2nd pick but EDGE is not a priority for them so do they just go with Young and hope the rest all falls into place? If they go Edge, their least urgent need, what will they do about OT?  Might they trade out of the spot to pick up more ammo to improve their 30th overall Criticality?

  ***************************************************************

The Fourth Annual All-Social Media Top 100 List for NFL Draft prospects is posted...check it out here!  https://boombearfootball.blogspot.com/2020/04/boombearjrs-fourth-annual-all-social_22.html

Boombearjr's Fourth Annual All-Social Media Top 100 NFL Draft Prospects

One More Time

Despite the harrowing times affecting the entire globe, we have a brief respite over the next 3 days with the long awaited NFL Player Draft.  We look to this, not to minimize the impact of the pandemic on the lives of so many, but to take time to remember that we can overcome anything.  Hoping everyone stays safe and we get to the other side of this thing better off than we are now.

We've Come a Long Way

What started as a curiosity project has evolved into an annual exercise and a year long chat that brings together football enthusiasts who debate prospects through the private chat hosted on Twitter. Dozens of individual scouts, both amateur and professional, have participated over the last four years.  Here are this year's contributors:

• Bill Carroll - Twitter Handle: @elevenbravo138
• Matt - Twitter Handle:  @ZazzyJets
• Jacob Infante - Twitter Handle:  @jacobinfante24
• Gab - Twitter Handle: @Gab48039612
• Ryan Rosko - Twitter Handle: @SkoSports
• Jack Cavanagh - Twitter Handle:  @javanagh
• Raju Byfield - Twitter Handle:  @FantasyContext
• AJ Milack - Twitter Handle:  @AJMilackNFL
• Josh Engler - Twitter Handle:  @Mr_Jengler
• Jason Truitt - Twitter Handle:  @TruittJasonNFL
• TheCutFFL - Twitter Handle:  @ theCutFFL
• Jack - Twitter Handle: @actionjack69
• Simon Carroll- Twitter Handle: @NFLDraftSi
• Andrew Pavlou - Twitter Handle:  @AndrewPav86
• Jimmy Williams - Twitter Handle: @draftguyjimmy
• Dean Pavlou - Twitter Handle:  @DeanPavlou
• Downtown Rams - Twitter Handle: @RamsDowntown
  I would encourage the reader follow each of the above.  A special shout-out to Bill Carroll who has participated in each Top 100 list over the last four years. He is the Godfather of DraftTwitter and a solid student of the game of football.  
  
  

The Top 100

Avg Rank: Average score for each player in the aggregation based on #1 overall assigned 100 pts, #2 gets 99 pts and so on, down to #100 getting 1 pt.

Off Prior Player:  The difference in Avg Rank of a player and the one selected directly before him.

Off Prior Pos Player: The difference in Avg Rank of a player and the prior selection at his position.

Notes:

• Votes were cast for 181 different players with the top 100.
• Polarizing Players - Of the Top 100 players, there were several who received NO votes from certain participating voters:
  • Ezra Cleveland ended up at number 48 on the list but 3 voters kept him off their lists entirely.
  • Neville Gallimore (#37) and Lloyd Cushenberry (#40) were each left off two ballots.
  • The highest ranking player to be left off a ballot was Kristian Fulton (#19) by one scout; we will see in 3 years when we review this Top 100 if the scout was right.
• Just One of the Crowd - Here is a look at the variance of picks for each scout measured by the average number of spots off the final aggregated grade of each player.

• Gab was most aggressive with his picks being an average of 23.82 places off each average (usually indicative of several sleeper picks making it into his top 100).
• Jimmy Williams continues his trend of running with the crowd with the lowest variance.  It should be noted Jimmy had the best performance vs. the actual draft last year.
  Draft Coverage
  As usual, I will review this Top 100 to the actual draft immediately after Mr. Irrelevant is picked AND annually to mark our progress. 
  Keep an eye out for my annual "Who's Screwed?" analysis of which teams are in the best position to meet their most pressing position needs which will be updated each night over the next three days.
  Enjoy and stay safe!



NFL Draft 2020 - Football Film Fight Volume 2 Part 6 - Defensive Ends

Livin' on the Edge - Part II

The designation "Edge" is assigned to off the ball pass rushers at defensive end or outside linebacker.  Just took a look at OLB and crowned a Football Film Fight Champion for 2020 for that position. Let's wrap it up the Edge position and look at the Defensive End position! 

As always, we start with Mel Kiper's post season Top 10 position list (published January 24, 2020 - we will compare his first list with his final list in another post) and pit the players against each other head to head.  I view 3 games for each (preferably, one from 2018 and two from the 2019 season) starting with #9 and #10. Winner moves on to face the next challenger and so on until we get a champion.  

• DNS = Density (Body Mass); highlighted are within 1 standard deviation of the mean for Edge rushers per Mockdraftable.
• Dns/Avg= % Density above or below the mean.
• Expl = Explosiveness per Pat Kirwan's model with desired score 70 or above. 
• n/a = player has not performed the tests required for Expl score calculation. 

Sack Concentration = the % of total sacks in one game with opponent noted.

Round 1:  #10 Taylor vs. #9 Robinson

Taylor Notes: Tennessee Team MVP - 2018.  Consensus four star recruit and All State (VA) as a high school senior.  Played in the Semper Fidelis All-American Bowl

Viewed -  Georgia 2018,  BYU 2019 and Florida 2019 - Gets off the ball. Deceptively powerful. Solid pursuit angles. Knows to follow through the back to cut off reverses. Eyes in backfield. Can drop into coverage.

Robinson Notes: All-ACC honors (2018 & 2019). HS All-State (TX) honors. Also played basketball and track.

Viewed - Notre Dame 2018, Clemson 2019 and Pitt 2019  Will be instructed to use his arms to keep space.  Crashed down on the line but left the edge exposed.  Eyes in the backfield, will need to find the ball before committing.

Winner:   Taylor
Taylor is a name I have seen around a lot and I see why.

      

Round 2:   Taylor vs. #8 Strowbridge

Strowbridge Notes: All-ACC honors (2018 & 2019).  Four star HS prospect per ESPN.

Viewed - Duke 2018, South Carolina 2019 and Temple  2019 -  Nice motor throughout the game. Eyes in the backfield led to hands up and PBU.  He was a 1T in 4 man fronts and lined up as a 3T on 3 man fronts. Didn't see him line up as a true DE. Likely projects as a DE due to size but while he has a nice motor, his explosiveness will need to improve. 

Winner:  Taylor
Strowbridge will need work to convert to a true end as he is a bit of a tweeter. Taylor has the experience advantage.

Round 3:   Taylor vs. #7 Greenard

Greenard Notes: Grad transfer from Louisville, earned All-SEC honors in his only season as a Gator. HS All State (GA) and member of the basketball squad.

Viewed - Miami 2019, Virginia 2019 and FSU 2019- Quick and relies on quickness. Most effective when untouched but has challenges with contact. 

Winner:  Taylor
Greenard shows leadership and speed but has to show he can drive through contact.

Round 4:  Taylor vs. #6 Kareem

Kareem Notes:  All State (MI); MVP of the Semper Fidelis All-American Bowl

Viewed - Michigan 2018, Georgia 2019 and Iowa State 2019 - Looks big and strong, needs to elevate game and take over. Did not see him dominate the individual matchups like you would want your top DEs. Could not see if there is any mean streak in him. Eyes in the backfield and will attempt to pursue the ball carrier.

Winner:   Taylor

Just didn't see Kareem take over a game like Taylor had on his tape.

Round 5:  Taylor vs. #5 Anae

Anae Notes:  All-American season  2019 at Utah and 2X All-Pac-12.  Morris Trophy winner (2019). School all-time sack leader (30). High school - All-State (HI), competed in basketball and high jump. Father was 2X All-American in football (BYU) and played in the USFL. 

Viewed -  Washington 2018,  Texas 2019 and Oregon 2019 - Big energy. Gets off the ball fast but a bit too fast sometimes (penalties). Relies on speed more than power. Eyes in the backfield.  Despite the motor can get into the bodies of OL and absorbed which negates any power he can muster. 

Winner:  Taylor
Anae is a fast riser but his size may inhibit efficacy at the next level.

Round 6: Taylor  vs. #4 Davidson

Davidson Notes: Four year starter, All-American (2019) and All-SEC (2016 & 2019).  High School All-American. Under Armour All-America game participant. Brother is an Auburn football alum.

Viewed - Georgia 2017,  LSU 2019 and Minnesota 2019 -  Power, power, power but does not command double teams. Not sure if he has any moves.  Aggressive. Moved all over the line. Appropriate pursuit angles.

Winner:  Taylor
Davidson needs speed or moves to supplement when power doesn't work. Aggressive at kickoff, opponents seemed to adapt successfully to his game.

Round 7:    vs. #3 Gross-Matos

Gross-Matos Notes: All-Big Ten (2018 & 2019); various All-American honors.  All State (VA) in high school.

Viewed - Purdue 2019, Michigan 2019 and Ohio State 2019  - Wins with power, speed and moves. Will throw the kitchen sink at you.  Great eyes to pick up the ball carrier and switch pursuit target on play action. Uses arms and hands well to keep blockers away. Didn't see him drop into coverage much.  He drives through contact on tackles instead of letting his lower body go limp...love that!

Winner:  Gross-Matos
This is as very complete a DE as I've seen for this FFF.

Round 8:   vs. #2 Epenesa

Epenesa Notes: All-American honors (2019), All Big Ten (2017 [Freshman team], 2018 & 2019). Three time high school All-American; three time first team All-State (IL). Scored 1,000+ points in basketball and state discus record holder (track and field All-American).


Viewed - Mississippi State 2018, Minnesota 2019 and USC 2019 - Can fire off the ball. Could use his arms to create more space.  A big DE but doesn't command double teams.  Didn't see the production I expected from a big draft name - thought he would be able to create more pressure by collapsing pockets than I saw.

Winner - Gross-Matos
Big name and a big man, would like to see AJ dominate more at his size.

Round 9:   vs. #1 Young

Young Notes: All-American honors (2019), All-Big Ten honors (2018 & 2019), winner of the Nagurski and Bednarik awards (2019) and 4 other individual awards. High school consensus five star athlete and #1 recruit in the state of Maryland.

Viewed - Penn State 2018, Michigan State 2019 and Clemson 2019 -  Fast and strong, he can beat you many ways. He must have the Force or something vs PSU 2018 because they just fall away when he approaches. It's crazy. Fast hands.  Good motor. Will drop into coverage. Hands up for PBUs. Here's his secret...some of his successful rushes seem to start with him breaking away from the QB, drawing out the OL or freezing him since he is trained not to chase out and once Young has the OL in an awkward position he just cuts straight at the QB. It's a nice technique because he is agile enough.

2020 Outside Linebacker Football Film Fight Champion...

Chase Young

Yeah, no surprise here. He is built for the job and is clearly the top Edge rusher in the 2020 draft.

#2 Yetur Gross-Matos

This guy has been downplayed much of the draft process but he has a skillset that you can't find anywhere else in this draft.

#3 Darrell Taylor

Looking at the 2018 tape, this guy has always had incredible instincts and talent but was likely slowed by 2019 nagging injuries.  Huge upside on draft day.  Check out this interview, not a puff piece, but a good insight into his personality.

BALLOTS DUE THIS SUNDAY 4/19/2020!!

Tired of reading other people's NFL Draft top players lists?  Give us your Top 100 list for the 4th Annual "PEOPLE'S" TOP 100 CREATED FOR US.  Check out last year's Top 100 HERE!  

Easy online balloting process allows you to vote for who you think are College Football's top players.  Just leave a comment of email boombearjrfootball@gmail.com to vote!