PDA

View Full Version : Top 2012 Prospects You Think Will Fall


AntoinCD
05-04-2011, 06:34 AM
It happens every year. There are always top rated prospects at this time going forward that fall in the draft. Im thinking of players like Jevan Snead, Joseph Barksdale, George Selvie etc from recent drafts. Some people had these guys as high as top 10 players yet they fell dramatically over the course of the season.

Players I think will fall:

Mark Barron-I really don't get the hype with Barron. He takes terrible angles, cant chase down ball carriers in the open field and often goes for the knock out hit instead of the sure play.

Jared Crick-Offers schematic versatility but only had one very good year when playing next to Ndamukong Suh. If his play doesn't pick up he could fall to the third round IMO.

Matt Barkley-Came into college with a tremendous amount of hype and was a first day starter at USC. However he hasn't really shown anything that deserves all the talk of him challenging Andrew Luck for the top spot next year. Plus he is undersized for a QB. I dont predict a Jevan Snead-like fall but wouldnt be surprised if he was a late first/early second guy and wouldn't bet against him staying for his senior season if he doesn't pick his play up

Donta' Hightower-Another 'Bama defender who gets hyped for no reason IMO. Despite playing with numerous first round talents around him he never does enough for my liking. Courtney Upshaw is the 'Bama LB I would be most looking for this year

DcmRulz
05-04-2011, 07:02 AM
Donta' Hightower-Another 'Bama defender who gets hyped for no reason IMO. Despite playing with numerous first round talents around him he never does enough for my liking. Courtney Upshaw is the 'Bama LB I would be most looking for this year

Yup. for exactly the same reason and I also think Upshaw (and Nico Johnson) are the guys worth watching.

Nick Foles-He looked pretty average down the home stretch, and I really wasn't too impressed with him otherwise.

Luke Kuechly-I have no idea really, it just seems like he's been out of his mind good the last two years. I just have that feeling that this year will be a down year for him.

Zach Brown-3 excellent games, and a lot of ho-hum ones does not a top talent make, especially in a year where there could be 10-20 good LBs available.

GatorsBullsFan
05-04-2011, 07:14 AM
Its only natural that Jared Crick could fall in next years draft...maybe not far but when a D-Lineman is rated that high and if in anyway he doesn't play out to his full potential this year he could drop from maybe a top 10 pick to a top 20 pick...or even out of the first round. Even though out of the first round is less likely high rated DT and DE at the beginning of a college season unless they're as dominant as a Ndamukong Suh type. Plus he is going to be under a lot of pressure to perform with that Suh Legacy over him.

I can also agree with the Donta Hightower, I know the guy is 6'4 260 pounds. He is a huge LB and I think that is why a lot of people like him. I just know when you draft a LB high on the board you're expecting to get a big playmaker and I'm just not sure how much of a playmaker he is.

SolidGold
05-04-2011, 07:17 AM
Crick was actually pretty consistent from 2009 to 2010...no real fall off in production. He should still be a first round pick and if he puts up another year of similar production should be one of the safest picks in the first round.

ElectricEye
05-04-2011, 09:55 AM
Crick was BETTER this year than he was last year. I'm really not sure how you can say that he wasn't besides lazy research and type casting. His numbers improved across the board and as you mentioned...he was playing without Suh. Turn on some of that A&M game. Von Miller had some real stiff competition for being the best player on the field that day. Crick almost won that game for Nebraska late singlehandedly.

thenewfeature06
05-04-2011, 09:59 AM
I slightly agree with Zach Brown, he really is great speed wise.. but a football player is something he is still learning to be.

stephenson86
05-04-2011, 09:59 AM
I think Matt Barkley could be a good candidate, Luck will go high for sure, but a lot of bad teams got guys for the future this year and depending how this season pans out and free agency, it may be a case of the bottom teams are set at QB and are lacking talent in other areas, he ends up falling to the late teens early 20's when he could be a top 10 in a QB needy draft.

AntoinCD
05-04-2011, 09:59 AM
Crick was BETTER this year than he was last year. I'm really not sure how you can say that he wasn't besides lazy research and type casting. His numbers improved across the board and as you mentioned...he was playing without Suh. Turn on some of that A&M game. Von Miller had some real stiff competition for being the best player on the field that day. Crick almost won that game for Nebraska late singlehandedly.

Sure he had some good games but more than a few games make a season. I also seen a lot of the time when he was completely taken out of plays with double teams and due to him becoming the focus of opposing defensive lines he wasn't nearly as impactful

ElectricEye
05-04-2011, 10:05 AM
Sure he had some good games but more than a few games make a season. I also seen a lot of the time when he was completely taken out of plays with double teams and due to him becoming the focus of opposing defensive lines he wasn't nearly as impactful

Having to be double teamed itself is a valuable skill and something very few defensive linemen in college football command. Not even the top ranked ones, sometimes. The fact that he did face much more in the way of double teams and defenses focusing on him and still managed to get into the backfield as often as he did is much more impressive than a few extra, meaningless, garbage sack numbers that won't tell you anything about his role in the NFL...besides that ever DT should play next to Suh. You've got a real weak argument here man, both the numbers and the film disagree with everything you're saying. I would have been on board with this if I didn't watch Crick extensively last year, I had similar questions to be honest, but I'm not sure how anyone can come away from watching what he did this season and say that he doesn't have a chance to be a first round pick. Actually, I guess I could if you wanted to question his physical tools. That might be somewhat fair, but I would still disagree... But to base it on production is absolutely asinine and an assertion with little merit to it.

Heck, I could honestly care less about the actual numbers for a guy like Crick. He does so many things well that don't show up on the box score, take the A&M game for example again. Blew up play after play and didn't get a reward in the stat sheet for it. The fact that he DID put up numbers this year and that they were better than when he was playing next to Suh and receiving single to no blocking is just another indication of how good he is.

AntoinCD
05-04-2011, 10:19 AM
Having to be double teamed itself is a valuable skill and something very few defensive linemen in college football command. Not even the top ranked ones, sometimes. The fact that he did face much more in the way of double teams and defenses focusing on him and still managed to get into the backfield as often as he did is much more impressive than a few extra, meaningless, garbage sack numbers that won't tell you anything about his role in the NFL...besides that ever DT should play next to Suh. You've got a real weak argument here man, both the numbers and the film disagree with everything you're saying. I would have been on board with this if I didn't watch Crick extensively last year, I had similar questions to be honest, but I'm not sure how anyone can come away from watching what he did this season and say that he doesn't have a chance to be a first round pick. Actually, I guess I could if you wanted to question his physical tools. That might be somewhat fair, but I would still disagree... But to base it on production is absolutely asinine and an assertion with little merit to it.

Heck, I could honestly care less about the actual numbers for a guy like Crick. He does so many things well that don't show up on the box score, take the A&M game for example again. Blew up play after play and didn't get a reward in the stat sheet for it. The fact that he DID put up numbers this year and that they were better than when he was playing next to Suh and receiving single to no blocking is just another indication of how good he is.

Yeah fair point I cant honestly say I watched him extensively as you have however I seen a few of his games last year and he wasn't nearly as effective as the year before IMO. Sure he's getting double teamed more but I would expect to see more from him. I didn't see the A&M game but if he was as dominant as you say I will have to re-think my basis. My point though was I still think people are rating him on film from two years ago. Ive seen some mocks having him as high as 2nd overall which I think is highly, highly unlikely.

I do hope Im wrong as I think he fits what the Patriots are looking for but I was expecting more. I'd like to see him split more double teams and at times he can get pushed completely out of the play. For someone his size I'd like him to be more physically dominant at the point of attack. Something that wasn't evident on a consistent basis last year. Just my opinion though

ElectricEye
05-04-2011, 10:24 AM
I wouldn't put him as high as second overall and I can see some backlash from that, but a lot of people have made the argument that Crick fell off the face of the earth last year without really checking their facts on the issue. Still think he has a very good chance to be a mid to late first round pick. Should be a good value in that spot too on top of it. Again, this is all preliminary stuff we're talking about here and there's still a chance for a new crop of potential five techniques to rise up, but I just don't see any good candidates right now.

Hightower and Barron I can get behind. I like Barron a ton as a player, but his role in the NFL will be a limited one. Hightower is drastically overrated according to early stuff from scouts and not really a special prospect at all.

Grizzlegom
05-04-2011, 02:31 PM
if Hightower has another mediocre (at best) season, he'll continue to stay in school. He's only a junior this season.

As for the question, I'll go with Nick Foles. I don't see the first round talk and I think he'll probably more of a mid-late round pick at best when all is said and done. Kenny Tate could be in for a fall just because of the position switch, should be interesting to see what weight he plays at next year and if NFL teams decide they like him better at OLB or SS. Tate and Lavonte David are both OLB/SS tweeners that will need to find their true NFL position but both have been playmakers in college.

CashmoneyDrew
05-04-2011, 02:52 PM
I don't see Barkley falling that much if at all. Especially for some of the reasons you listed. His size is just fine. Bigger than Sanchez. Same size as Stafford. Plus his play did improve from his freshman year. He should do better this year with better talent around him.

SickwithIt1010
05-04-2011, 03:00 PM
I don't see Barkley falling that much if at all. Especially for some of the reasons you listed. His size is just fine. Bigger than Sanchez. Same size as Stafford. Plus his play did improve from his freshman year. He should do better this year with better talent around him.

This....Barkley most definitely isnt small by any means. At 6'2" hes at the same height as guys like Sanchez and Aaron Rodgers. Do you want a QB that is 6'5"? Sure! thats always nice, but 6'2" isnt small by any means.

This past season he did make improvements from his freshman year. He still tries to force too many balls but hes got the arm strength ya look for and he has been trained to work in a pro style offense since he could basically craw, so hes not lacking in the technique or fundamentals aspect of the game.

People assume since hes at USC he has to be every bit as good as Leinart and Sanchez were, but the truth of the matter is....he hasnt had anything near that talent that those guys had to work with....things havent been the same in LA since he got there.

Complex
05-04-2011, 03:30 PM
Landry Jones I don't get the hype and I think this top 10 pick talk is going to fade this season.

ElectricEye
05-04-2011, 03:38 PM
Nick Foles is a real good one. I see a mid-round system quarterback who just happens to be 6'5. Arizona has put out quarterbacks with better numbers over the past few years who have gone undrafted too. While Foles might be better than some of those guys, I still don't buy him as a starter at the NFL level.

CashmoneyDrew
05-04-2011, 03:44 PM
Travis Lewis is one of my guesses.

Babylon
05-04-2011, 03:59 PM
Travis Lewis is one of my guesses.

I never thought he had the size to be effective in the NFL.

As for Barkely he'll do fine this year, offense is never a problem with USC and he has an NFL arm. Pete Carroll might break the mold and grab an SC guy for a change.

ElectricEye
05-04-2011, 04:26 PM
People assume since hes at USC he has to be every bit as good as Leinart and Sanchez were, but the truth of the matter is....he hasnt had anything near that talent that those guys had to work with....things havent been the same in LA since he got there.

I really don't think supporting caste is an issue with Barkley either though. He played this year with top ten pick at tackle this year and one who will be in that territory next year. Receivers there aren't anything special right now, but there's no glaring absence of talent either. Pretty solid rushing attack too, albeit one without a real focus or head like in years past.

I don't disagree that Barkley is talented or USC isn't what it used to be these past few years, but the supporting class argument just doesn't make much sense.

SchizophrenicBatman
05-04-2011, 05:29 PM
Does Nick Foles count if no one in the NFL really thinks he's a top prospect to begin with?

Anyway I'll go with most of the UNC players. Worked last year

Babylon
05-04-2011, 05:53 PM
Does Nick Foles count if no one in the NFL really thinks he's a top prospect to begin with?

Anyway I'll go with most of the UNC players. Worked last year

A healthy Foles should have a good year, big guy, good arm. I may be nuts but i dont see a heck of a lot of differance between him and Blaine Gabbert outside of a little mobility.

CashmoneyDrew
05-04-2011, 06:05 PM
A healthy Foles should have a good year, big guy, good arm. I may be nuts but i dont see a heck of a lot of differance between him and Blaine Gabbert outside of a little mobility.

Good point. Foles actually had better stats this season than Gabbert.

ElectricEye
05-04-2011, 06:20 PM
Good point. Foles actually had better stats this season than Gabbert.

Stats really don't mean much when you're coming out of an offense like that.

Plus, having better stats than Gabbert is setting the standard extremely low....

CashmoneyDrew
05-04-2011, 06:30 PM
Stats really don't mean much when you're coming out of an offense like that.

Plus, having better stats than Gabbert is setting the standard extremely low....

It's not like Gabbert's stats came from a pro set offense either though. I'm just pointing out, like Babylon said, they have similar stats, size, arm strength, and come from similar systems.

ElectricEye
05-04-2011, 06:50 PM
It's not like Gabbert's stats came from a pro set offense either though. I'm just pointing out, like Babylon said, they have similar stats, size, arm strength, and come from similar systems.

A lot of people had major beef with all that stuff about Gabbert too.

Foles is actually less raw as a pocket passer than Gabbert was, significantly less even(again, setting the standards fairly low), but the tools are far inferior. I caught a lot of him late in the season after coming back from injury...and even when things were clicking right statistically for him, he was really laboring on the field to get those stats. Nearly everything for him comes after the catch besides the occasional floater that he throws up to Criner to make a play on deep down the field. Legit feel he's in the same building as Tony Pike was before everyone got to really breaking him down. Large framed guy who everyone assumes has the arm to match, but when you turn on the tape it's just not there. I really don't think he's particularly accurate even, either. His ball placement leaves something to be desired for sure.

As I mentioned before, Arizona Quarterbacks have been ringing up NFL prospect numbers for awhile now.

Matt Scott, the guy he beat out due to a combination of early struggles and injury, actually out played Foles by a bit last year to the tune of a 150.9/776/ 71%/ 4-2 line last year in just three games. Going beyond the pure statistics of it, which admittedly don't tell the whole story, he threw a much more catchable ball and drove it to the middle of the field much better(Foles lived around the edges last year).

In 2008 Willie Tuitama, a guy who the NFL really didn't want anything to do with, did the same with a 145/3093/64.9/23-8 line. Number were comparable the year before too. Granted, Willie had some character concerns if I remember correctly...but we all know the NFL will forgive that if you're a good player. But he didn't look natural putting up those statistics and Arizona wasn't any the better team for it either really.

So yeah, it's real easy to put up statistics in that offense. Combine that with Foles lack of arm strength and mechanical problems(one thing that's not getting a lot of play right now is his slow release. It would be the slowest of any major prospect since Tebow if you consider him a prospect) and I really think you've got a system quarterback who just happens to be tall. The thing people hit back with all this is his lauded ability to make reads...but that's more fiction than fact at this point. So much of it is based on bubble screens and passes behind the line of scrimmage. We're not talking a Sam Bradford Oklahoma every part of the field is in play spread, we're talking a Texas Tech type system.

CashmoneyDrew
05-04-2011, 07:04 PM
Fair enough. I've only seen Foles play twice which is about the same number of times I saw Gabbert play. For whatever reason I came off liking Foles better.