The Ringer NFL Show - The 10 Draft Commandments

Episode Date: February 17, 2025

Steven and Diante get ready for the start of the football calendar by analyzing and debating some of the most common clichés and trends NFL teams fall victim to when preparing for the draft. Don’t draft a running back in the first round (3:54) Don’t trade up (unless it’s a quarterback)(10:48) Wait to draft your wide receiver (18:01) Don't overuse the “generational prospect” label (23:14) Scout the player, not the helmet (28:01) Avoid the late breakout/older prospect (30:28) Beware the workout warrior (34:52) The 40-yard dash time is the best metric (41:13) There are no good linebacker prospects (44:55) Post-processing QB prospects (50:59) The Ringer is committed to responsible gaming. Please visit www.rg-help.com to learn more about the resources and helplines available. Hosts: Steven Ruiz and Diante Lee Producer: Chris Sutton Social: Kiera Givens Production Supervision: Conor Nevins and Arjuna Ramgopal Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Hey, it's Brian Curtis from The Ringer, and I want to tell you about the Press Box podcast. The Press Box is a podcast for anybody who likes news, whether it's about sports or politics or pop culture, and wants to understand how that news really gets made. We have news shows every Monday and Thursday. We have long interviews with everyone from John Crackhour to Joe Buck. Your social media feeds are bursting with information every day. Let us help you sort it out. Join us on the press box.

Hello and welcome to the Ringer NFL show. I am your host, Stephen Ruiz. I am joined by Deonté. We have an oops-all-co-host edition of the show today, Deontay. And we have just gotten through our first full week without NFL football. I want to know how did you manage to get through it. This has been great for my sleep schedule. I would definitely say coming back from central time to Pacific time, took my melatonin,

knocked out. I've been trying to recharge this week. It's been nice to not have anything other than highlights from the Senior Bowl or other Super Bowl stuff I might have missed out on to consume this week. And outside of that, there has not been much else football going on in my life. Yeah, how I knew we were free from like The Beast, I guess you could say, was I saw that report last week that the Steelers were checking in on Trevor Lawrence. They were calling up to Sea of the Jaguars.

Yeah, we're in nonsense season. And I didn't have to have a take about it. I didn't have to formulate a take. I didn't have to write anything. I didn't have to do a pot segment. and it felt good. And honestly, like,

is that even a story? Yes, the Steelers were interested in a quarterback who was better than theirs. If I was a team, if I was running a team, I think I would call every organization

with a good quarterback and see if I could trade for that. I would trade, I mean, I would call up the charges about Justin Herbert. After that interception, that four interception performance

against the Texan, I would have every bad faith talking point. I was like, he doesn't win the big games. He throws a lot of picks in the fourth quarter. You think about trade them? I mean, the maps trade.

Luca. I feel like you got to shoot your shot. I guess you got to shoot your shot, but this very much feels to me like when you go doing house tours in the most affluent areas of your city, knowing good and damn well that you can never afford those mortgages. You know, I just want to poke around really quick, show some face, shake the hand of a realtor, make them think that you're in that kind of tax bracket when you know good and well that this is not, if it's for sale, it's not something that you can afford. And chances are it's probably not going to be on the market anyways. And maybe you leak the story to a local radio guy and he tweets it out and then the fan base thinks you're trying. They think you're trying. They think you're

trying, and that's been a big talking point in Pittsburgh is they're not trying hard enough. But we don't have to talk about that. You and Sheel had the off-season primer last week. So I decided maybe we should do a draft season primer this week. We are in that kind of no-man's land between the end of the season and the spiritual start of draft season, at least for me, the NFL Combine, which is at the end of February. So we wanted to come up with a list of draft cliches, mantras, adages, trends. I don't know what you want to call it.

really just shit that people say about the NFL draft. And we're going to decide if these rules or whatever, whatever word you want to use should be codified, should they be amended, should they be straight up abolished? And that's what we're going to do today. We love cancel culture here at the ringer NFL show. So we might have to cancel some draft cliches. And Sheel might not be here with us in person, but he's here with us in spirit because I stole a lot of these from an article he wrote in 2021 for the Athletic called the Ten Commandments of Draft.

I would like to see him update that article because I think his thinking has changed. I think a lot of our thinking has changed, especially about the draft in recent years. So it would be interesting to see how he updated his takes on the draft from a couple of years ago. Maybe we'll be on the ringer.com later this month or maybe next month. But let's start with the red mediaist of them all, the one that gets people feral, the one that gets people talking and shouting at each other. Don't draft a running back in the first round. just to lay out some of the recent history.

We had no first round running backs in 2024. We had two in 2020 with Bajan and Jemir Gibbs. None in 2022. We had two in 2021 with Najee Harris and Travis Etienne. And then we had one in 2020, C.E.H to the Chiefs, Clyde Edwards, Hilaire. So I just want to start it off with you. What's the highest you would draft a running back in the first round of the NFL draft? I mean, I thought that Bijon Robinson married at a top 10 pick.

I think I would say that he was obviously kind of in a class of his own in terms of pedigree coming out of college, right? Like you had all the physical attributes. You had the stats, the production. You could turn on the film and see that that was a guy that can add value as a blocker, as a runner, as a receiver. So I would say, like, top 10 is reasonable if there's a special player. I do think, and this is something I'm sure I've been banging the table on for maybe the last three or four years, that the idea that you just sight unseen, don't draft a running back in the first round is kind of nonsense. insinical to me, right? Like, you would never say never draft a guard or an interior

offensive lineman in the first round. You might have conversations about what it takes to be a top 10 prospect in that respect. But if the guy's good, you get good players high in the draft. And I would say that, like, we had conversations about laughing at Jerry Jones last year about, oh, you know, I definitely wanted Jonathan Brooks. I definitely wanted Jonathan Brooks. And you wait too long and a team jumps from front of you in line and they go and get the good football player you were looking for. I don't know if there's necessarily a top 10 player in this class, even considering Ashton Genti for as good as he is. I'm interested to see how he tests out at his size around 220 pounds.

You would like to see a guy be in that kind of sub four or five range in the 40. I'm really fascinated to see if he can cross that line at the pro there, at the combine, depending on when he tests. But just as a general principle, if a guy is a top 30 player in the NFL draft, you go get that guy in the first round. Yeah, I totally agree with you on this point. I think there is a certain skill set you need to see from the running back. I don't think you should draft like any old running back, say like a bruising running back

who's just going to run over guys and you know his shelf life is going to be short. But with these dynamic backs, and I feel like over the last couple of years, maybe people are warming up to the idea that maybe you can pay a running back. We saw the success of Saquan Barkley. Obviously, they win a Super Bowl having splurged on a free agent running back. And we know how important he was. Derek Henry was a huge part of the Raven success this year. I know they didn't make it further in the playoffs,

but I thought they were a stronger team heading into the postseason because of him. And then Jemir Gibbs, I think, is the one guy who, it's not like Barclay, where Barclay needed a couple years and he needed the perfect situation to really explode onto the scene and become that player that we all thought he could be when the Giants drafted him second overall. Jemir Gibbs second year was maybe the most explosive playmaker in the NFL if you look at the numbers by EPA, especially compared to what other running backs do. And two years ago when the Lions made, that pick, I was slamming them. I wrote an article. Like, what is the lion's lands? But now,

I agree with you. If he could be one of your top five players, I don't care about the position, I'm drafting him. And I guess maybe I should ask myself the same question that I want to ask you. And that's like, what skill set do you want to see out of a running back to feel comfortable taking them with that first round pick? You have to be a dynamic receiver, right? Like, I don't want to sound like a fantasy football guy, but you do have to be a dynamic receiver out of the backfield, I think to merit being that bona fide first round pick or you have to just be so special as a runner that it's undeniable that even if you're coming off the field on third downs like a Derek Henry, that teams have no answer for you on early downs that you can change the math in terms of how teams have to play in the box.

And that's a tough thing. That's a tough box to check, right? Like there are so often where you can look and see like, okay, a guy's 215 pounds, runs a low 4-4, but he just does not pass that eye test as a runner, right? maybe he has decent vision, but not elite breakaway speed. I think a lot of times about Joe McKnight, rest and peace, you know, when he was at USC, you think about just like the profile of a player, right? Taller, he's got a good frame, has measurable speed, but you turned on the film at USC, and it's like, he's not breaking away the way that you would like to see for an elite running back.

So I would think that if you can cross that kind of threshold where it's clear that if this guy gets space, if we see a team with the light box and we give this guy a run, it's outside zone counter, whatever the case may be, and that can be 30 yards for us if he makes a guy miss. That was the draw for a Jamir Gibbs. That's obviously the draw for Abidjan Robinson for those guys his first round picks. And I think that if we're going to have any conversation about running backs that can do that in this class, those will be the guys that clearly are on that fringe of being a first round draft pick. I think that's what it is for me, even more so than the receiving element where Christian McCaffrey obviously brings that. But I think the thing that made Christian McCaffrey special, especially two years ago with the 49ers and the thing that made Seyquist, special and Jemir Gibbs special and Derek Henry special this year was that ability to turn a

five-yard run into a 25-yard run. Right. And to add an explosive element to your offense that maybe your passing game doesn't necessarily have inherently. And I think when I watch Ashton, Jay-T, I haven't like studied the tape. I know you wrote an article about him. You've been tracking him all season long. But when I watch him live just as a football fan, a casual college football fan, he seems to check

that box. It seemed like every time he touched the ball, there was a potential for an 80-yard touch yard. Even if they were on the 10-yard line, this guy could pop an 80-yard inexplicably. But, yeah, so I think I would be comfortable drafting him. I don't think I would draft him in the top 10 because I don't know if he has that receiver element, which I think is a box that you need to check. But he does have that other element.

And if you drop him behind a good offensive line, I think he could be not only like a pro bowler, but a player we're talking about as an all-pro impact player for a playoff team within two, three years. I agree. I mean, if you're a team like the Chargers, right, where you know you're trying to build this offensive line, you're trying to build up a steady rushing identity, you've got to be crossing your fingers that Genti like has a bad, has a quote unquote bad combine, right? That he runs like a 452 at the 40. And now the teams that would be drafting in the top half of this year's first round isn't interested, aren't interested anymore. And he can slip to you, right? Because if you can get a guy like that, that might be that last complete piece in terms of adding an explosive rushing element that can change. change the dynamics of your offense. I think Houston is in the same boat as well. There are multiple teams that I think know coming into this offseason that they have to balance out their offensive attack. And I think they're trying to find a young dynamic running back is going to be at the high on their list. And if you're looking for that this year, you're going to have to do it in the draft because this free agency class is not very pretty in terms of finding dynamic guys.

No, not at all. And the same is true for quarterback. We're going to move on to our second one. And that's don't trade up for any player, I guess, unless it's a quarter. I think the draft, the nerds, the analytics nerds are really adamant about this one. You don't want to trade up for, quote unquote, your guy, especially at a different position that isn't. Premium position like quarterback. Just looking at the last couple of years, some major tradeups. We had the Texans trading up for Will Anderson. We had the Saints traded up for Chris Alave.

The lines traded up for Jameson Williams. The chiefs traded up for Trent McDuffie. The Eagles traded up for Jordan Davis. The Packers traded up for Christian Watson. A year before that, the Bears straight up for Kevin Jenkins. the Broncos trade up for Giovante Williams, and New England trades up for Christian Barmore. So I feel like there's a mixed bag there.

There are examples of teams, landing players who have become foundational players for their rosters and even for ultra-successful teams like the Chiefs and the Eagles. But there are also cautionary tales, like the Bears trading up for Tevin Jenkins. So how do you feel about trading up and when would you do it and would you restrict it to certain positions, whether it's premium positions,

are secondary premium positions. It's hard to say that you only do it for premium positions, right? Because so much of the, I think in the list that you're giving and in the conversations we have about trading up in the draft, you think about receiver often, right? Because we keep thinking about like, oh, what will the number one receiver do for an offense? And I think that that was the motivating factor for a lot of those tradeups.

Obviously, Christopher Watson, Chris Olave. And these are guys that I like, right? But I don't know if they're math changers for your offense. And I think that that might tilt you more in the direction of, unless it's a quarterback, unless it's like a surefire left tackle, unless it's a surefire edge rusher, don't make that trade. I do still lean, though, on going and getting your guy, right? Like, I can't imagine how many teams wish they could redo the Kyle Hamilton draft,

their situation with Kyle Hamilton in that draft and allowing him to fall into the mid-teens for Baltimore to be able to scoop up. And that was a guy that everybody knew. You watched the tape. That's a top 10 player in that class. I still don't understand it. Probably a top five player in that class, honestly, if you're looking at the tape and how he projected as a player. And the guy falls to the mid-teens to a defense that you know that if they have him and employ him properly, he's going to be an elite playmaker.

And that's exactly what we've seen for him. I would say, like, there are certain positions that either have long trajectory. So I'm thinking linebacker. I'm thinking tight in. I'm thinking about center. You can make maybe the argument for safety unless it's a sure for a guy like Kyle Hamilton. and the guy's kind of up the spine of the football field. I can understand there being a little bit of hesitance there

because there's a lot more variance, I think, in outcomes. I would say, though, if you know the guy's a difference-making player, there's just no good reason to let that guy pass by or to rest on your laurels and hope that he falls to you later. I've been a bad host so far because I forgot to do the bit for the first one we did. We're supposed to either codify, amend, or abolish these draft mantras or whatever you want to call. For the first one, I'm going to say we're going to amend it.

We're going to outright abolish it because I still think you're getting bad value. But if you've got a guy that can hit the home run who can add some element to the receiving game, by all means, take them in the first round. For this one, I'm kind of with it to a certain extent. Because I do think that teams tend to fall in love with the prospect, even though there are other closer prospects. It's hard. And that's always been like the philosophy behind not trading up is teens aren't good at separating

like QB1, for instance, from QB2. And if you look through draft history, that's been proven over and over and over again. And honestly, I would add quarterback into that list unless it's a guy like Andrew Luck, because we've seen in the last few years, we have both thrown out draft rankings for quarterbacks and how often did they end up looking good in three years?

Rarely, rarely, if ever. So, like, I wouldn't trade up. I'm a guy that would like to trade down, just collect those draft picks, and then take swings on guys that I like, but not necessarily that I'm like clamoring for with the rare exception. Like I think if you're trading up for like a Michael Parsons, for instance,

like a guy, you could just watch the tape and be like, yes, that guy's going to be an elite player in two years. By all means. But like the tradeups for like a second round defensive edge that you just happen to like his tape. Like I feel like Carolina used to do this all the time 10 years ago. And it backfired every single time. I don't support that at all.

So for this one, I'm going to say let's just keep it. Let's codify it. I'm for it. Yeah, I would say we keep that, yeah. Yeah. So don't trade up unless it's for a quarterback. And honestly, I wouldn't need, in this draft, I don't think there's a quarterback worth trading up for it.

Do you think there's a player worth trading up for? I'm fascinated to see what Abdul Carter looks like as an edge rusher. I think that so much of this is conditional because of just the way that the draft order stacks with New York and Tennessee around the top, knowing that they're quarterback needy teams, even though this is not a sexy quarterback class, I think that we can get weird movement. And I guess I'm saying that now, right? And we always say this right, at this stage before we get to the combine,

before we get to pro days and free agencies. But we just expect, we expect the teams at the top to behave in the most logical, most straightforward way possible. And there's no guarantee that we get that. I just think you look at Jalen Walker, you look at Abdul-Carter, these 250-pound guys with elite speed, great length, can play the run, can get after the quarterback. If those guys fall, you know, to pick four to eight because quarterbacks are going early,

if I'm a team and I feel like I need to reestablish myself my defense and start rebuilding that side of the ball, and I've got an opportunity to do someone that's not going to cost me more than an additional first round pick, I'm making a move for that level of player in this class. And Mason Graham, I think, will probably be added into that mix as well. Anybody after that, the chances are that the margins are so small between the rest of the guys that you can probably wait and still get good value, even if it's not the guy that's at the absolute top of the class. Okay, so maybe we should amend this. Because something you just said, like, just piqued my interest.

I do think you should trade up for that guy if you are a contender and you feel like you're one piece away. Right. And even there are exceptions to this rule. Like the Texans trading up for Will Anderson, all of us slammed it at the time. It ended up being a good move. I actually didn't slam it. I was just being humble there. I don't think you slammed it either.

I don't think I'm going to. Yeah, yeah. We knew ball. We knew ball. But I would say, like, if you're Indianapolis, right? Like if you're a team that you're kind of locked in with your quarterback, everybody's job is kind of on the line this year with making this work. And you've got a chance to go get a high-end defensive player to pair with Luana Rumo.

Why wouldn't you trade up for 14? Why wait? Why wait and get the fourth best edge in this class? If you can go get what you believe would be an all-pro guy by the end of his rookie deal, I think that it would make a lot of sense in that situation, even if it doesn't necessarily put them in the conversation with Baltimore, or Kansas City and Buffalo as the top AFC contenders. It's a big leap

and it probably gets you out of the tier of Denver, Pittsburgh, and the Chargers, you know, the teams that are kind of hanging around those lower seeds in the AFC. You wait because you're Chris Ballard in the media. Exactly. You can do no wrong. And Jim Mersey has given you a job for life, apparently. So you can be

patient. You can never win a playoff game. It doesn't matter. Just keep kicking the can down the road. All right, let's move on to the next one. This one I'm actually stealing from our buddy, Ben Solac. he wrote this, I believe, two years ago. I know he did a video on it. There are so many good wide receiver prospects. You don't have to draft one in the first round.

You can just wait to day two and get a good one. How are you feeling about this one? I would say to codify this if you're not in the top 10. If you're not in the top 10 and going to get a guy that's like immediate X receiver, number one. You know it. You can, you know, blind, you know, totally blind. Jamar Chase. Exactly.

Julio Jones, AJ Green, Malik Neighbors, like you said. Justin Jefferson, those guys, it makes a lot of sense if they're available to go get them. And obviously, Jefferson, you kind of have to wait a little bit to go get that guy. I would say that once you get outside of that class, and it's a very rarefied air to be that kind of player leaving college, after that you probably should wait because chances are you're just getting a high-end utility guy, right? Like the chances that you go fine, a T. Higgins is maybe low in the second round. That's probably a first round prospect that should have been drafted higher. in his class and just happened to slip.

But outside of that, chances are you're going to get your slot, your Z receiver, your move-around guy, you're maybe a high target volume guy, at a bunch of different spots in the draft. I think it makes a lot of sense to wait if you're not getting that surefire number one type. Yeah, I think what you said is a perfect way to put it. Like, there are certain archetypes that you maybe reach for in a draft.

And I think even like T. Higgins, who was drafted, I believe the first pick of the second round, he fit that profile as a number one receiver, a big body receiver who can line up on the line of scrimmage, you can beat press coverage, you can isolate to one side, and you know the defense has to react to that. Those are guys I would take in the top 10,

and I would draft in the first round, but from like picks 10 on in the first round, I'm totally with you. I don't want to be drafting a wide receiver two with a first round pick. I don't want to be drafting a slot guy with the first round pick. So even if I see a guy like Ladd, McCawley, last year, who you can get on day two

and puts up crazy numbers and emerges as like the number one receiving target for Justin Herbert, he's never going to be that guy that tilts coverage. Right. He's never going to be that point of reference player for your quarterback. And I do agree that you can find those guys on day two and day three. But like AJ Brown is a great example. He probably should have been a top 10 pick looking back on him. He fits the profile.

He's that true ex-receiver who can win one-on-one. We saw him just abused Trent McDuffie whenever the chiefs try to cover him one-on-one on the outside. that's a guy that I'm drafting in the top 10. Right. I know how good Amon Rae St. Brown is. I know how productive he is. I know how important he is to Detroit. Sorry, I'm not using a top 10 pick on a guy like that.

I think the guy that kind of symbolizes this best is Garrett Wilson, right, who was a 10th overall pick in his draft. A player that I liked coming out of college, coming out of Ohio State, a guy that I thought merited maybe being towards a back end of the first round as a player. And if you look at the stats, the raw production, it looks. looks like something you'd be happy with over 1,000 yards in each of his first three seasons, but he's a high volume guy in terms of target share. I don't know if you're necessarily getting a game-changing player. That's not Justin Jefferson getting 130, 140 targets.

That's a slot receiver, a Z receiver, you know, not saying that you can find him anywhere, but I don't know if you're getting high-in, true wide receiver 1 production, the way that you were thinking about when you went and spent your top 10 pick on that guy, I don't necessarily think it's anything negative about Wilson, but I just think that that's an example you can use as a cautionary tale of just saying, hey, let's just go grab a guy who's a great athlete who's got good pedigree, and we'll just drop him in, and he can be a quasi-wide receiver one. I think that what we're seeing in the NFL now is that there's a very specific definition of what that is,

and then there's everybody else. And if you're part of the everybody else, even if you're a productive player, it does not necessarily mean that you're that top 10 level of pick in any draft, especially not this one. So are we saying Ted McMillan in the first round and nobody else this year? Even with Ted, I think that there's a lot of conversations to have about Ted McMillan and what kind of separator he's going to be,

what kind of ex-receiver he's going to be. But I think if you're going to take that kind of swing, he's the only guy in this class that I think is worth that. Yeah, like I'm looking at the other prospects. Like Luther Burden, I know is an explosive playmaker, but I can't get over seeing 5-11. Exactly. Yeah, so that's a tough one for me.

Sorry, Meg Schuster. A mecha-Booka is going to be a high volume, Target guy. There's a lot of guys in his class that I think will be, you know, Tess Johnson and other guy is probably going to be a gadget guy that I know everybody seemed to like at the Senior Bowl or a strong game, whichever one of the two he played at. I just don't see difference makers, potential difference makers outside of McMillan and Burden and with Burden you mentioned the size profile.

That's not a guy that's going to be your ex-receiver. And he's not Jamar Chase, you know. No, yeah. Jamar Chase is a guy that defies measurements. Like he was a shorter receiver. He had shorter arms and you, you would. Nobody can guard him, and he still moths cornerbacks on the regular. There is no generational wide receiver prospect in this draft, I would say.

We're going to take an ad break. And speaking of generational prospects, we're going to hit on that after the break. All right, we are back. Our number four draft commandment that we are reviewing is we overuse the generational prospect label too much. I think there's been a lot of blowback, especially in recent years, to the generational prospect, especially with some. I don't want to say busts. I don't want to say failures,

but I would definitely say Trevor Lawrence hasn't lived up to the generational tag. I think Caleb Williams had a rough rookie season. Kyle Pitts is definitely someone who fits this billing. He was definitely sold as a generational prospect, and we haven't seen generational production from him. So do you feel like we throw around

the generational prospect label too much? And then should we put like a cap on it? Like one every three years, one per position every three years? Like, what do you think the cap should be? I think generational is probably just too strong of a term. I think it just creates an unfair expectation for a lot of guys, right? Because Andrew Luck was a generational prospect.

And I don't know, like, for as much as we all love Andrew Luck. And I can go on a poll tape now. It's like, that looks like generational quarterback play. When you think about just like him within the history of the modern NFL, I don't know if people are going to feel like they got a generational player or he was on track to give you generational production even before he retired. But I guess the trouble for me is like, this isn't college football recruiting where you can say that's a four star. And everybody understands what it means to be a four star, which is like physically you're great.

Your production coming up to this level has been great. And you project to continue to be a good player. But it doesn't guarantee that you're going to be a superstar. And the same with five star. It's like you check all the physical boxes. Everything looks like if you hit all your, you know, highest in projections that you're going to be a star player. But that does not guarantee anything. And I think that maybe in the NFL, we have to kind of reshape the way that we talk about those high-end guys, those guys that check all the physical traits.

Because sometimes it's Jalen Carter and sometimes it's Jordan Davis, you know, and it doesn't mean that those guys aren't useful. It's just like generational is just too much of a weight, especially at the quarterback position, I would say, to be putting on these prospects coming out of college. Yeah, I think the problem is that people ignore the second word in that phrase. It's generational prospect, not generational player. think, like even Kyle Pitts, he was a generational prospect. How many tight ends have we seen who are that big and can run four, three, and can catch like him and have the wingspan that he has and has the route, have the route running chops that he has. And he wasn't a bad blocker either. Like, he was a generational prospect, but generational prospects don't always turn into generational

players. I think your point with Andrew Luck is spot on there. I think Trevor that applies to. I think like even Caleb, I think Caleb is the one where I think you can quibble with the fact that he was a generational prospector, build like one, just because he was shorter, we have seen that style of quarterback. We have elite speed. Yeah, we've seen that style of quarterback. I think he was a generational thrower of the football.

Like, we haven't seen a guy throw the football with that command in recent years. Like, even Mahomes threw it. I don't think he had as much finesse as Caleb Williams had in his last year at USC. So, I don't want to amend this one. I don't want to abolish it. I feel

like it's fine. I feel like the use of generational prospect is fine. As long as you keep it within that vision. Very strict parameters. Yeah, yeah. Like Brock Bowers, for instance, I feel like he was the guy that a lot of people push back against being a generational prospect in this draft, in last year's draft. And then look at the guy go during his rookie season. They built the entire past. I mean, he's like genuinely the best receiving tight-in in the NFL from year one. He broke the record in his first season. He broke the record for Mike Dicka's record, which stood for like what, five decades. I don't know. So I have no problem with the use of generational prospect. As long as you're not putting it on like a guy like, I don't even know, like, Shador Sanders, obviously is not a generational prospect.

Even like Cam Ward who has like the arm and the physical ability, I wouldn't, I wouldn't put it on him either. So I mean, nobody's going to want to hear it. I don't know if I'd call Travis Hunter a a generational prospect either. I think that he's got one of a kind, a one of a kind pedigree as a two-way player. But I don't know, unless we see like four, three-two speed, which I don't think you see on tape when he plays for as smooth as a runner as he is, I wouldn't call him generational either. Champ Bailey was a generational corner prospect to me. You know, you can make the argument that Patrick Peterson was a generational prospect, and he

didn't necessarily live up to exactly what everybody expected, and I still think he had a great career. You mentioned Charles Woodson. Those are the kind of guys that I think about. It takes nothing away from Hunter, but he's not Revis. He's not Sir Tan the Second. He's not Jalen Ramsey coming. out of college. There's a long list of guys that we have considered generational prospects.

I just don't think that this is the class to be putting that label on guys. Yeah. All right. So let's move on to the next one. This is an adage that's been passed around for years. Scout the player, not the helmet. Now, I kind of want to push back against this one, because I think there is some value in looking at where a player came from, what system he came from. For instance, like an Alabama player, I think they've had a reputation of maybe being worn down a little bit by Nick Sabin. Because just, because he demands so much of his players. And then quarterbacks who play in certain systems,

I know like the Ohio State thing was always, like don't draft Ohio State quarterback, even though nobody was, like nobody was drafting J.T. Barrett in the first round and was drafting Cardell Jones. Like, yeah, Justin Fields happened and didn't work out. But also, C.J. Stroud worked out, so it didn't hurt. But I do think there is some value in paying attention to where a player

comes from, what school he played for, how long he was there, and how he was coach. So I'm interested to hear your thoughts on this one. I guess you would admit, I would amend it, right? Within how we gamified this, I would say we would amend this to accommodate what you're saying, right? Like, I can speak for me as somebody who does spend time with draft guys. It does matter to me what helmet you have on. It matters what level of development you received.

It matters what the level of competition it was that you played against. I think that it just doesn't end there, right? I would say that the idea of scouting the helmet, that's not, a tiebreaker for me. If I think I have two even players, I'm not going to go with the SEC guy instead of the Mountain West guy just because you went and played at Mississippi State or you went and played at Ole Miss or you played at Arkansas and I saw you play against Georgia and Alabama in LSU. Like, yeah, that's nice for just kind of gauging what you look like against the best players. But it's not a tiebreaker for me. But in terms of just like, I want to know if I'm getting

the list, if I'm a scout, I'm getting a list of the guys that played in. at the highest level. First, I want to see what those guys look like. I think there are like counter examples to that where like scouting the helmet kind of worked out in the team's advantage. I think of like DeNeil Hunter who didn't have a lot of sack production. But if you really looked at LSU and this is maybe isn't like scouting the helmet, so to speak, but more like looking at the team he came from and what they asked of their players. I do think you could find some players who maybe haven't shown everything they could show at the next level. But yeah, I agree with that one. I think there is some about

to it, but I think, like, for the most part, you shouldn't, like, I don't know, stick stereotypes to players, like Ohio State quarterbacks, for instance. All right, let's move on to the next one. And maybe the NFL is already amending this one themselves, because I feel like these prospects have kind of had a moment to use a Bill Simmons phrase over the last couple of years. Avoid the late breakout slash older prospect. And I feel like the quarterback position has really kind of changed this, especially

with Jayden Daniels having success after being a transfer quarterback. Bo Nix was obviously a very mature quarterback. We're still making jokes about his age in comparison to other young quarterbacks. Joe Burrow was an older prospect, and he worked out just fine, as Bengals fans will tell you. So what are your feelings on the late breakout

slash older prospect? I'm thinking of like a Tyler Warren at Penn State, the tight end, who had a great season this year, but he is advanced in age. I would say that you could codify this within the confines of like the premium positions, right, especially like the ones where you need to have athletic outliers, right?

Like, I know that this comes out very often with receivers, and it makes a lot of sense for receivers because physically, to hack it in the NFL as a top-end receiver, you have to have a level of athletic ability that other people can't match, right? It's not just, oh, year or three, year four, after I've spent, you know, my late teens, early 20s on the jugs machine every day. Now I finally got my hands together and I can grasp this offense. And I'm the only guy on my roster that's a high level receiver. so I'm seeing the ball all the time.

I think that Wondell Robinson kind of falls into that, right, late breakout guy. And I think that he's fine. But, you know, for as good as a route runner as he is, I don't think you're ever going to get top in pro bowl level production on him on a year by year basis. I would say a quarterback, I guess it's tricky because like you said, with Joe Burrow, with Michael Pinnock's, with Boe Nicks. And I guess maybe not for Bo Nix because he got to start at Auburn. He played a long time in college. Right. And I think for Michael Pinnock's, he would have been starting all those years had he not been hurt so often. I do want to leave a caveat at that position specifically because you do need to get reps, right?

There aren't going to be any Matt Castles, right, where people still are going to draft you. Back to the conversation about scouting the helmet. We said, oh, you went to USC and played quarterback and you're a tall white. What were you in and give you a shot? That was the entire profile for him. I don't think like younger fans realized this guy did not play any. snaps at USC and was drafted in the NFL as a quarterback. It was insane at the time.

And like, you have to say looking back, it worked out. It worked out. Yeah. I was just saying like tackle, edge rusher, wide receiver, corner. Late breakout guys probably deserve a bit of an orange or red flag on that. For the other positions, development physically and mentally is a really big piece of the game. I'm a little bit more amenable to giving guys a shot if they don't break out until their junior, senior, or fifth year.

Yeah, I think with quarterback, it matters like how they kind of developed what their developmental track looks like. Like Joe Burrow, even that first season starting in LSU, if you go back and watch that tape, you could see the elements that made Joe Burrow the number one overall pick the following year. Like you saw him, you saw the accuracy, you saw the pocket navigation, you saw the processing speed. I feel like it was boosted the next year because he's playing with, you know, 15 pros on both sides of the ball and the Avengers at wide receiver. but a player like Bo Nix, like Bo Nix, the freshman,

wasn't Bo Nix the freshman at Oregon. Bo Nix, the freshman at Auburn, and Bo Nix, the player at Auburn, wasn't really Bo Nix the player at Oregon. I think that's where you kind of, you have to kind of raise that red flag and be like, all right, what's going on here? Why is this happening?

Why does he look like this type of player now and didn't look like this player in a different situation? Examine the offense, examine the supporting cast, examine the play calling. I think you do have to do more work when it's a quarterback, and I do think it should be a red flag.

So I don't want to abolish this one necessarily, and I don't really want to amend it. I think this is one that we can keep how it is, except for, yeah, I guess there is a caveat. The premium positions, it does seem to matter. I want a freak. If I'm drafting a premium position in the top 10, I want a freak.

I don't want a guy that was better than everyone else on the field because he was more experienced and older than everyone else on the field, which I think is a fair thing. All right, so with the combine a couple weeks away, We know there are going to be some winners and losers of the combine. There are going to be some guys that put up numbers we didn't expect, which brings us to our next draft commandment number seven. Beware of the workout warrior.

There are plenty examples of guys who have just exploded on the scene. Mike Mumula, I think, was the OG back in the day. I think it was the early 90s. I think the Eagles ended up drafting them. Did not work out. Bruce Campbell, former Maryland Terrapin, was not on anybody's radar as the first round pick. The Raiders ended up drafting them after a big combine. Did not work out.

And then maybe my favorite example of all time is Arkansas's Matt Jones. He was a quarterback at Arkansas, went to the combine, worked out as a receiver. Ran just an insane number. I can't even remember what the number was. At his size, he was a big, big quarterback who could run, who could move. It was like a four sub four four four. I think you were like a four three something. And the Jaguars took this man with like, I believe it was the number 18 pick.

It was a top 20 pick or around top 20 as a receiver, a position he never really. played in college and it did not work out at all. He had some off-field issues too. It cut his career short. My brother was a Jaguars fan. My brother was so confident in Matt Jones becoming a player. He bought a Matt Jones jersey when he was a rookie. He might still have it. I know he rarely wore it because he didn't have a lot of opportunity to. But those are the guys that didn't work out. But on the other end, there are guys that if you maybe put more stock in the combine, you would have drafted them higher. Like JJ Watt, for instance, I think was a player that was a player that was almost viewed as a reach when the Texan draft at number 11.

But if we were just paying attention to the combine, he would have been a top five pick in the draft. Byron Jones with the Cowboys. I remember him blowing up there. D.K. Metcalf is another guy, although I think there were some fans of D.K. Metcalf as wide receiver won. I was one of them, by the way. And honestly, that was the wrong take because A.J. Brown was in that draft.

So where are you at with the guy who doesn't have the production? Anthony Richardson is another example. We don't know, but it's looking like he's not going to work out. I'm coping with that one. So where are you with like the workout warriors? Do they peak your interests? Are they guys that where you're just like, I don't really care? To me, it's just like it's fun for a week.

It is fun for Combine Week when you see like, what, Troy Anderson ran a 4-4-1 at linebacker from Montana State? Like, huh? I need to go back and watch, right? Have you ever seen Anderson use that for whatever speed? No. He's great and Madden, by the way. Great Madden franchise player.

Yes. I mean, and I'd say the defensive players are just good for this in general, because in last year's class, I remember Peyton Wilson at NC State put up a really good combine as well and peaked the interest and being drafted by the Steelers. And you watch them play at NC State and it's like, this is the explosive guy? I don't see it. Right? Like, where are the linebacker skills? And maybe, you know, maybe that athleticism turns into something eventually. I'm just not interested. I've seen it too many times now. We saw Travol Tramon Walker become the first overall pick because of his workout. And I mean, he looks like a decent secondary rusher now, but it took three seasons, basically. And the next edge rusher was the most productive guy in the league before he broke his leg and Aidan Hutchinson. Maybe just as productive as Walker with like a quarter of the season. Exactly. Exactly.

So I'm not really interested. It doesn't move me anymore. There was definitely a point in time, especially early in trying to get an understanding for the draft where you start learning about metrics and thresholds athletically at these positions. And you start, I think, maybe hyper fixating on stuff like that. And you see guys that check these boxes, even if they don't have the film and you just

start feeling like, oh, man, they get to the league. You get NFL level coaching and they'll turn into something. I just have to see it on film, man. Like, I wasn't, I didn't think that Patrick Chetan the second was going to be an excellent corner in the league because of his size and his speed. I thought he was going to be an excellent corner in the league because every time he played up against somebody outside of Jamar Chase, his last year at Alabama against LSU. He looked like the best player on the football field.

And I need to see that more than anything. So the workout stuff really doesn't move me anymore. Yeah, the thing that people always say is like, oh, I have to revisit his tape now. No, you don't. You don't have to revisit his tape. The only way you have to do that is if you never watch the tape to begin with. Like if there's a guy that you hadn't watched and he puts up these crazy numbers, then by all means, I think you should go back and watch the tape.

But if you watch the tape and you were like, me, like a Hakeem Butler for me, that's the guy for me, the wide receiver from Iowa State who a lot of guys had, even as high as wide receiver one in that class, I watched his tape, it was bad tape. He was getting pressed by future FedEx drivers in the Big 12, in the Big 12. And this was at the height of Big 12 nonsense defense.

He was getting pressed. He wasn't getting open. He was dropping a lot of passes. But then he went to the combine. He jumps, he has like a 40-inch vertical, and he runs like a 4-4, and he's huge. He measures, he's tall, he's big, he can bench-press. But then he gets on the field,

and, well, he never really gets on the field at Arizona. and he basically almost got cut in his first training camp if he hadn't gotten hurt. And then he made that transition that so many slow, big wide receivers have made. We're making you a tight end, buddy. Exactly. You're ready to learn tight ends.

Right. You know, I think about Taylor Mays too from our childhood, right? Like 434, almost goes sub 4344, 340, ridiculous bench reps for a safety, had like a 40 inch vertical. And they were basically making them a linebacker like his third year in the league because you just knew he couldn't hack.

Isaiah Simmons recently is a guy who is pinged between linebacker, safety, nickel, all these different spots between Arizona and New York, and all the measurables look great, but you look at the film and it's like, I don't know if I'm looking at any one particular kind of football player, right? So you just have to be, and I guess that that's just been instructive for me. That's been a big education for me in trying to project what it's like in the league. These tweener types that are just great workout warriors just don't end up doing much. ride receiver defense tied in like you said it's hard to it's hard to project if the tape isn't there no yeah so for the for those prospects day two end of day two by all means take a shot on a guy who's

running a fourth three days 400 pounds but yeah I would not trade up I would not I would not draft Bruce Campbell even though he's a turp in the first round all right we're going to take another break and then we're going to come back and get our last three draft commandments all right welcome back since we're talking about workout warriors we got to talk about the 40 time And I don't even know if this is a draft commandment. I just came up with it on my own. 40 time is the most important combine metric or the one that you're checking in the most for the most positions.

I know there are positions where it doesn't really matter. But how do you feel about 40 time? And are there any other drills that you would put over it in the hierarchy, regardless of a position? I mean, if I'm picking just one across all positions, it's 40 time, right? Specifically because you get the 10-yard split that you can judge against the ultimate 40-time. And if you're smart about it, you understand how to consider mass, right, your body density, how you're running relative to

other guys, your size. I think that it can be a really good tool. Obviously, the three cone drill for defensive ends for edge rushers is a big one for me, even though guys just really don't participate in it anymore. And maybe that's the bigger opponent conversation, right? Is that we're kind of left with the 40 is our only real measure at the combine of a guy's just like explosive athletic ability outside of like the vertical and the broad jump. right those are like the three now that i would say are like the holy trinity of trying to judge how

explosive a guy is because those are the only ones that they do anymore right because i mean and for good reason right those are the drills that get guys paid you put up your 11 foot broad jump your 43540 and a 38 inch vert i mean you're going to be on everybody's radar even if they didn't love you before you moved up the draft board just based off your explosive potential um so for me i guess it is the most interesting i would just say i i i rarely walked away from a combine saying, oh, the guy who ran the 4-3 is going to be a good player.

I'm always just looking at what's your body type, what's your mass like, what are you like relative to other players your sides, and then what's your 10-yard split? Because that's really going to tell me, especially as a defensive-minded guy, what's your quick twitch muscles look like? What player from this class

would you consider their 40-time is the one that you're most interested in seeing? Is it Travis Hunter? Probably not. I would really say, like, Abdul Carter. Abdul Carter is a guy I'm really interested to see like what his top end speed, what his 10 split and what his top end speed looks like. And I would say Will Johnson as well as a corner, right? Because he's got all the size in the world, 6-2.

You can maybe get a Patrick Sertan level player out of that guy if the speed is where it was at for Sertan at that size and weight. So yeah, I would say more of those guys that I'm interested in than Travis Hunter. I don't necessarily have high expectations for Hunter. And the other thing that we have to remember is that like he's a sub-200-pound guy. right like we had this conversation with Xavier Worthy who was even lighter than Hunter was right he was in like the one high 160s to low 170s and he was playing at

Texas goes and runs a 421 which is awesome but relative speed relative to size it's not the most impressive thing in the world it's greatly impressive you broke the record it's a hell of a record to break but not the most impressive thing size wise I don't have the highest source for Travis Hunter unless he did come out and go sub 43 which I guess with all the hyper training that exists now

is a possibility. I just don't know that I necessarily see that when I watch them on tape. We need size adjusted lengths for these timing drills. I don't need to see a defensive end run 40 yards. I do want to see a cornerback run 40 yards. I want to see a defensive end run 20 yards

and see how fast he gets off the line's crib. Honestly, we need more of these things. I think the fact that you can bet on 40 times is going to just make the importance of 40, like media hyping up 40 times. And it's really the only thing I watch when I'm watching combine coverage. I don't,

admittedly, I don't watch a lot of combine coverage because it's the same thing over and over again. And my eyes can't tell the difference between a 4-2 and a 4-3. Like, I'll wait until after and just look at the list of things. Yeah, I still think it's the most important. I don't think we have to actually,

like, a Justice one of Abolish it either. Just wanted to throw that one out here. This is what I'm really interested in talking, especially to you about number nine is there are no good linebacker prospects anymore. And this is more, I don't know if we have to, like, judge the value of this statement, but I just want to talk about why that is. And why do you think

like the linebacker position coming from college is kind of fading out or getting harder to project to the next level? Because it's two different sports. And I know that we talk about this with our colleagues all the time every time we get together in indie and we're just going over players that we've watched, you know, what workouts are looking forward to. This seems to be the one position where no matter who I'm talking to, everybody just kind of throws their hands up with it and says, well, that guy's a good athlete. That guy made a lot of tackles in college, you know, like I think about Quay Walker, right, who was like the third guy in the rotation at Georgia, but ends up being a first round pick because Green Bay looks and says, you're like 6'4, 250 pounds

with these ridiculously long arms, and you were in on third down. So clearly they trusted you to cover. You got some coverage skills. Let's see if we can make a full linebacker out of you. I think that that's just going to continue to be the conversation because of the way the college football is played. It's so spread out. The hashes are not replicated from one level to the next. You get all those super wide splits where you have wide receivers that are out

on the tick marks next to the sideline. You know, so you have to cheat. You have to do the 53 and the third yard side to side feels differently on college hashes than it does in the NFL. And what's happening in the box is different, right? The level of detail in terms of run games, the motions, the way

that offenses can pick guys out that they want to attack and that they want to leave alone. There's just so much stress now on the pro linebacker. It's almost unfair to expect any of these guys to drop in day one and be impact players. Like I think about Edger and Cooper at Texas A&M, who I watched a bunch of last year before the 2024 draft. And I just didn't know what that was supposed to look like in the pros. And he gets to Green Bay and you see them just kind of using him as a downhill guy, blitzing, simulated pressures. And he looks very productive from that respect. But that kind of linebacker play is not what you see from Roquan Smith at his best. That's not what you see

from Fred Warner at his best. That's not what you saw from Zach Bond this year. And I guess the roles at linebacker, because they can be so disparate, makes it hard to see what an all-pro-level player looks like at its highest level versus a guy who can just be extremely productive in a specific kind of role. It almost feels like the conversation we were having about quarterback prospects maybe 10 years ago, maybe pre-Mohombs where there was this panic about the golden age of quarterbacks kind of coming to an end, Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, obviously stuck around for a few more years, Drew Brees, Aaron Rogers, Philip Rivers. And the talk was, oh, they're not coaching them up in college anymore. And then we get this new generation and nobody's worried

about the future of the position now with like a handful, maybe like six or seven quarterbacks who could be elite five years from now. Right. And it feels. It feels like the game came back to those quarterback prospects. Like the game evolved. I guess it's not came back. Game evolved and we saw a bridging of the gap between the college offense and the NFL offense. Do you think that's where we're headed for NFL defenses? Because like you said, we are seeing more simulated pressures,

which is just like a second level defender rushing and then a first level defender dropping. I'm kind of simplifying it there, but that's the gist of it. Do you think we're just going to see more of that as teams realize, look, we're not going to be able to draft Dante High Tower in the first round of it. or the second round anymore. So we might as well come to them and play this style of defense from now on. Is that what you're seeing around the league?

I think so. I think that we're kind of going through an implementation lag, right? Like, I think about the big man in basketball, right? When, like, it became clear that, like, length and mobility, you need this, a certain combination of length and mobility. So you just saw teams just drafting anybody

who was over 610 and had a 7-3 wingspan. It didn't really matter what their footwork look like. That's the only matter how they protected for the last decade. Exactly. you know and sometimes those guys hit right but it's much more of kind of like a blind item picking thing than actually scouting out traits i think that what you're seeing now in terms of body types is a lot of length at linebacker i think it's starting to intrigue teams just so that way you know if the guys who are twitchy and have length can just cover the ground that you need to in coverage and then i think that they're just going to eventually see college schemes get implemented in the NFL on the defensive side we're obviously seeing more and more of that I think that as more split safety coverages spread across the league, you're going to see more teams borrowing from the college level because it's necessary to handle all the space that you see at the college level in the passing game.

So I think eventually they will kind of find that middle ground between finding the right kind of body types. These guys who almost look like edge rushers, like I think Jihad Campbell from Alabama, who's going to be in this class definitely meets some of those thresholds in terms of long arms. he's a 240, 250-pound guy. You look at that guy and say, if somebody would have told you to pay 4-3 edge rusher, you probably would still be a draftable prospect.

It's just going to take you time. And I like his tape, it still will probably take him some time to find his role in coverage and as a run fitter, whether you're playing the mic, whether you're playing the will position in nickel or in base. It's just so much on these guys play. I think we are still maybe a half decade away from really getting to a point where we,

feel solid about what the right kind of linebacker prospect is going to be in the NFL going forward. The linebacker archetype that I miss the most is like the 5-10 squatty linebacker with the neck row. The fire hydrants, 1,000 percent. London Fletcher, the London Fletcher is of the world. We need those back. So I totally agree with this one.

There are no good linebacker prospects anymore. And I doubt there will ever be one, at least one that like fits our childhood view of what a line. Yeah, we're not getting any more to keel spikes. Those guys are coming. Rebecome. We need the success of the Eagles and all these teams with these strong running games to lead us back to Zach Thomas being a viable NFL linebacker in this day and age. All right. This one is just for me. Because this is a saying that hasn't caught on. I'm the only one that says that. I've been throwing it around in the group chat. I've tossed it around on this on this podcast a couple of times. Are we post processing? And I feel like I have to explain that because nobody knows what the hell I'm talking about. Are we post processing when it comes to quarterback prospects? And my theory is, is we put too much stock in the idea or in evaluating how a quarterback, a college quarterback, processes in the pocket and how they operate like an NFL quarterback.

And my theory is that we put way too much stock in it because they are not being asked to process like an NFL quarterback. So we shouldn't expect them to process like an NFL quarterback. And you get hung up on those things and you end up missing on prospects. Some recent example, I think Josh Allen is a great example for the post-processing theory. I think Justin Herbert is, because a lot of the pushback against him as a prospect was the fact that he was late on a lot of stuff and that he didn't make quick decisions. He was playing in an offense that didn't really value that. And then we saw him go to the NFL

and he was the complete opposite of that. He's one of the fastest processors in the NFL. I'm thinking of guys that got overvalued because of that. Mack Jones is definitely one of those guys who his whole thing was, oh, look how quick he processes. Well, guess what? He can't throw and he can't move and he can't run and you can't create when things break down. And also, he's actually not that great of a processor. He was just an RPO offense and he's one. Same with Tua. And Tua is another one.

So where are you at in the post processing theory? Are you coming with me? Are you pushing back against me? Are you kind of half one foot in, one foot out? No, I'm with you. I think that it's one of the most overused terms when we talk about guys coming from college to the NFL. I don't know if I see processing nearly even 15% as often.

as you hear it mentioned in an evaluation from a quarterback because of the RPO, because of the amount of space, because the college pocket is nothing like the NFL pocket. All those things have a lot to do with your processing ability. It's different for Jared Goff at Cal where your tackles are taking these vertical air raid sets and you're in empty and you're playing up against these disadvantaged defensive backs in the PAC 12. And that's not to say that we didn't get impressive throws over the middle of the field from him there or him working the ball aggressively. Like, yes, we did. But the version of Jared golf that we have now is not that player.

Not at all. And the version that we have now didn't exist in 2017, 2018 to 2019, right? Like, it takes time. And I think that so much of what makes a quarterback successful in the NFL is finding shortcuts, right? Like I said multiple times that this was the best version of Lamar Jackson that we had seen from him in the pocket. And if you watch the tape, it's about him finding.

shortcuts. He knows exactly when he needs to go to the backside. He knows when the throw is not going to be there. He knows when he can and can't work the middle of the field. And he knows when it's time to scramble. Josh Allen has gone a long way and his pre-snapp ability to just diagnose where defenses are going to do and where to go with the football. We talked over the last three weeks about Patrick Mahomes in that regard, Super Bowl performance notwithstanding. Even with like a guy like Brock Pretty, right? Like you can look at the tape and say, oh, this was his best processing year. This was also the year where he just did the most drop-back stuff, right?

So the version of the quarterback that we saw in the first half of the year from Brock Pretty was not the guy we had in years past because they didn't operate that way. And it's fine, but that's also not the guy that he was at Iowa State. So I just, I would like to set that aside, right? The idea of being a processing wizard aside for quarterbacks, I think it's a little unfair to them because we're not going to ask these guys who are likely going to be drafted to bad teams or playing behind bad offensive lines early in their career

to be able to just breeze through these pro-level progressions the way they did in college. It just doesn't work that way. The way I like to evaluate quarterbacks is, like, I like to look at their throwing ability first and foremost. Can they throw the football? Can they get the football to the target? And it doesn't matter if it's with a strong arm

or it's with an overly accurate arm. Does it get to from point A to point B reliably? And then from there, I think I do like to look at the quarterback's process. It's not necessarily mental processing. It's like, how do you react to stimuli? Like, if you have a free rusher in your face, what is your reaction? Is it to back up and retreat? Is it to, can you work around that guy and still get a throw off while keeping your eyes downfield? Is it to slide around him a la like Tom Brady, who was never a runner, but a very quick processor in the NFL? But also, like, when you go back and watch Tom Brady at Michigan, the thing that

stands out isn't his processing. It's the fact that he's one, he's very tall. He has a stronger arm than anyone ever gave him credit for. And he was able to remain a passer, a viable passer, in the face of pressure. Like, even in Alabama, I know we all saw the clip of him running that 40 time, and it was like a 5.2.40 time. But you go back and watch his tape, he's making defenders miss. And he's buying himself time, whether it's in the pocket or outside of the pocket. And like, that's what I want to see. And that's the type of processing, quote unquote, that I want to see is like, how do you deal with pressure. How do you turn a situation where the offense lost the down? Can you flip it? Can you get your offense back in front? That's the type of processing I want to see. I don't care if I see the

guy's helmet straight move. Exactly. Like when I first started evaluating quarterbacks, that was my, that was my shit. Like if I saw your helmet straight move, I was like, whoa, this guy's going through progressions. This guy's the next Tom Brady out there. And then it's like Deshaun Kaiser at Notre Dame. And they're like, oh, he actually sucks. Josh Rosen at UCLA. He was really good for that. He's the processing, just the golden prospect of processing. But yeah, those are the guys that I've kind of given up on. And it's the guys that I've missed on, huge, before the draft, Josh Allen, Justin Herbert, Patrick Malams.

I was betting against talent. I was looking for that processing. I was looking for them to act like an NFL quarterback at age 21 when they weren't asked to be an NFL quarterback. And I think the NFL teams that were able to look past that are the ones that have elite quarterbacks now. And the ones that weren't are the ones still trying to draft quarterback. Right. I mean, and you know, another guy that I think about in this respect is Baker Mayfield, right? Like he was a guy who coming into the NFL, if he was going to be successful, it was going to be as a processor. And it takes him to get to a second stop in eight years into his NFL career for him to have.

Fourth stop. Correct. Yes. Right. Four stop. Right. To be able to build up enough reps to feel like, you know, you have a good grasp of this offense. And he had to be with high-level offensive coordinators who could help provide the shortcuts in his passing progression. that he needed in order to be successful. That's just how this stuff goes, right? Like, I would retro-rather, to your point, Herbert for me was a guy that I was always kind of banging a table on because I'm like, big fast, strong arm.

Like, there's an offense for that. We can figure that out. It sounds like a dumb guy argument, doesn't it? It sounds like the caveman argument, but sometimes with the draft. Like, that's what you got to do. You got to be a caveman with it. It works out. Well, and then it's funny because it doesn't always apply

because Josh Allen I watched, big, strong, huge arm. And I was like, absolutely not. There's no way that this is going to work. Right? But the truth of the matter is, if you have that top end, that upper echelon level arm talent and athletic ability and the size to be able to get away from past rushers or shake off pressure in muddy pockets, all it takes is the exact same kind of reps that it takes a guy like Baker Mayfield to get there as a processor. And now you can access all your physical traits as well as everything you've learned about how to attack NFL defenses, which is why you kind of land with debates over Anthony Richardson, right, as a physical prospect. who has not yet built up the reps to be able to handle an NFL offense when the bullets are flying. I think that in those cases, even though it frustrates me watching him play, I understand why the Colts made the pick. I understand why the Colts are going to ride this out. And I understand

why this is a guy that people were intrigued with when he was coming out of this, coming out of the drag. Why I'm still coping in 2025? 1,000 percent. And I think this is going to be a fascinating conversation in this class because of Shadoor Sanders, who I think is going to be the processing. darling because you see him stand tall in the pocket, take hits and still throw the football. There's going to be a lot more contextual stuff that I think people are going to have to evaluate with him and with Cam Ward. I don't think that just slapping the good processor tag on these guys is an accurate

representation of who they are as players. Now, and speaking of Josh Allen, like, I feel like it hurt him because he was in a pro style offense. And I feel like we hold that up as like, oh, he was in a pro style offense. That's going to make him a better prospect and prepare him for the pros. what I think that led to at least draft analysts and some of the teams I guess that were lower on him is that you got to see him fail in an NFL style offense

where it was easy to kind of project that. You'd be like, oh, if you can't do that here, I don't know if he's going to be able to do it here, whereas you take a Patrick Mahomes who's in an air raid offense, you didn't get to see him fail in those specific ways and that might have helped him as a prospect. Although Josh Allen went much higher than Patrick Mahomes, so maybe I'm wrong about that.

But that's going to do it for us. We went through 10, just to recap. Don't draft a running back in the first round unless he's a home run hitter who can add something in the past game. Do not trade up at all unless it's a quarterback. Although we've amended that, if you're a contender who just needs like a piece or there's a blue chip prospect that's falling at the bottom of the first round, by all means go for it. We did agree that there are so many good wide receiver prospects, you can wait to draft one on day two unless he's that bona fide blue chip top 10 X receiver. If he's a slot receiver who can project to be a good player or number two receiver, you can wait until the second round. on him. I'm fine with the overuse of the generational label. I think Deonté, you were pushing

back against it a little bit more than me. We decided that it is fine in some instances to scout the helmet and not the player. We were both kind of iffy on the late breakout prospects, especially at premium positions, blue chip positions. We agree, beware of the workout warrior. We're not falling for it. If you don't have good tape, we're not drafting you in the first round. 40 time, I guess it is the most important combine metric. But again, check the tape. The tape matters way more than your times. There's never going to be a good lineback prospect anymore, not one that we like at least.

And I'm saying it, we are post-processing. I don't know if Diote agrees, but I agree. So that's going to do it for us. There's your 10 draft commandments. We're going to be back next week with another pod. I want to thank Christopher Sutton for producing the episode, Kare Gibbons, on socials, and also thanks to Arjuna Ramgabal,

and Connor Nevins for additional production and supervision. We will see you next week. Must be 21 plus and present in select states for Kansas in affiliation with Kansas Star Casino or 18 plus and present in D.C. Gambling problem. Call 1-800 gambler or visit RG-Helpshelp.com. Call 188-78-88-989-7777. Or visit ccpg.org slash chat in Connecticut or visit MD gamblinghelp.org in Maryland. Hope is here. Visit Gamblinghelpline MA.org or call 800 3275.

50-50 for 24-7 support in Massachusetts, or call 1-877-8-8 Hope NY or text HopeNY in New York.