Eagles, Combine Updates

Posted: February 23rd, 2013 | Author: | Filed under: Philadelphia Eagles | 68 Comments »

Day 1 from the Combine is in the books.  I think the Eagles should be happy.  Chip Kelly likes athletic OL.  We saw plenty of them today.  That means the Eagles don’t have to spend pick #4 to find help for the guys up front.  There will be options in the 2nd and even 3rd rounds.

I think the #4 pick could also be more valuable now.  We knew that Luke Joeckel and Eric Fisher were going to be Top 10 picks.  Lane Johnson from Oklahoma had a great showing and now could be a Top 15 pick.  He could even be Top 10 material.  If you’re the Cardinals and Joeckel and Fisher are gone…do you take Johnson at #7?

This is worth discussing because some teams are semi-desperate for OT help.  The Chiefs will need a LT if they let Brandon Albert go. The Cardinals, Chargers, Rams, and Bears need serious LT help.   The Raiders could use a RT, or a LT so they could slide Veldheer to RT.  The Lions could potentially use a LT.

Daniel Jeremiah, former Eagles scout turned NFL writer/analyst, swears no team will trade up.  I get his logic (there’s no player worth moving up for and lots of talent in other rounds), but you just wonder if one of the teams desperate for a LT will decide to make a move.  I won’t speculate on every possible scenario.  You just wonder if someone will decide the risk is worth it.  The Chargers sure do make a lot of sense. They’ve got a star QB in Philip Rivers, but his performance has dipped in the last 2 years due to poor protection.  Best way to help him…get him a stud LT.

As to the Eagles, the presence of Peters allows them to gamble on a player from the other rounds.  Terron Armstead might have run his way from the 3rd round into the 2nd.  Kyle Long had a terrific workout and could be 2nd round material.  Mike Mayock speculated on him being a 1st rounder.  Justin Pugh still has the short arms, but looked excellent in the OL drills today.  He’s probably a 3rd rounder.  Reid Fragel could be 2nd round material.  Dallas Thomas didn’t work out today, but has LT potential.  Brennan Williams is very under the radar at this point, but a player the Eagles could like.

Reuben Frank reported that the Eagles met with Pugh at the Combine.  Twice.  That could just mean he had a casual conversation with a scout before/after having the full meeting with the team.  Teams don’t have multiple interview sessions with prospects in Indy.  Too many players to talk to.  No matter what, it is interesting that the Eagles talked to Pugh.  He could play LT, RG, or RT.  His arm length is a legit concern, but he has good feet and is a tough run blocker.

Long is a player that continues to grow on me.  He has good size.  He’s athletic.  He looks mean and (more importantly) plays mean.  He’s physical and tough.  LT might be a stretch for him, but he could be a very good OG or possible RT.

Lots of possibilities.

* * * * *

Mike Garafolo of USA Today reported that the Eagles and Chiefs have had trade talks involving Nick Foles.  The Eagles publicly continue to say all the right things.  I get the sense that the Eagles intention is only to deal Foles for the right price.  I don’t think a 3rd round pick is enough to pry him away, but this is purely a guess on my part.

If you trade Nick, you almost have to turn around and spend a pick on a QB.  You want a young QB on the roster.  You aren’t looking to dump Foles.  The goal is to get enough in return that dealing him is worth it.  Chip Kelly likes Foles, but doesn’t love him.  You must get enough back so that you can add a QB this year and make the deal worth your while.

Would KC give up their 2nd rounder?  Would they trade their 3rd and 4th?  Maybe the Chiefs give in and pay the price.  Maybe the Eagles give in and take less.  We’ll see.

Getting Foles would be huge for KC.  That would give them a QB.  They could spend pick #1 on Joeckel and have a good OL in place.  They’d then concentrate on re-signing Dwayne Bowe.  That would be a nice offseason for a team that was dreadful on offense last year.

* * * * *

Eagles scout Brett Veach was down on the field watching the TEs work out.  Brent Celek will be the starter in 2013, but behind him the Eagles could use some help.  I’m not ready to give up on Clay Harbor yet.  The Eagles also have Evan Moore and Derek Carrier coming back.  Moore is the NFL vagabond who has yet to pan out anywhere, but has enough talent to keep teams interested.  Carrier is an undersized athlete that was on the practice squad last year.

The Eagles could go for a TE early, late, or as a UDFA.  This isn’t a need area, but is a spot where an upgrade would be nice.  The problem is that we’re not sure exactly what Chip Kelly is looking for.

I didn’t think any of the TE prospects had a great day.  Several were very good, but they were expected to be that way.

The one guy who posted great numbers was Chris Gragg.  And if Kelly wants a smaller guy that can run/jump, Gragg is the guy.  He’s 6-3, 244.  Ran 4.50 and had a 37.5 vertical jump.  I thought he was solid in the on-field drills, but not great.  Gragg definitely opened some eyes.

* * * * *

Lots of great discussion in the previous post about what the Eagles should do in the draft.  One of the key points is about value at #4.  Greg Cosell made a great point today on NFL.com.  Each draft is a separate entity.  You can’t fixate on the #4 player this year vs last year or the year before that.  There might not be the same kinds of choices.

In a normal year, the Eagles would not be talking about some of these guys at #4.  Unfortunately, 2013 isn’t a normal year.

Trust your draft board.

* * * * *

One guy we’ve discussed is Dion Jordan.  He measured in today at 6-6, 248.  That’s good for a SAM/OLB.  He is going to have surgery to repair a torn labrum and will be out for 3 to 4 months.  He’d be full go by Training Camp based on that schedule.

* * * * *

Jimmy Bama and I recorded some podcasts.

Here is our take on Chip and Howie’s PCs from the Combine.

Here is the first 10 mins of a draft discussion (OL).  Skype issues.

Here is the final 50 mins of the draft discussion.

We didn’t get to some of the questions/topics you guys had the other day.  We will over time.  If not, blame Jimmy.  It’s all his fault.


68 Comments on “Eagles, Combine Updates”

  1. 1 GermanEagle said at 4:55 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    Again: what was the best 40 time by an O liner (+300lbs) at the combine ever?!

  2. 2 TommyLawlor said at 5:01 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    Armstead is the fastest I’ve ever seen. Bruce Campbell ran 4.85. That might have been the best time prior to today.

  3. 3 Scott Greenberg said at 5:16 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    Allen Barbre was faster I think.

  4. 4 bridgecoach said at 7:38 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    Vontaze Burfict, Quinton Coples, Melvin Ingrim were all slower… The 40s and 10 splits of these 300 lb olmen is insane. And both Armstead and lane can play the position too. Wow. Just wow.

  5. 5 Baloophi said at 7:58 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    Bruce Campbell runs smart… S-Mart.

  6. 6 ezgreene said at 4:55 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    I don’t see why the Eagles would trade down. Herremans and Peters are 31, Peters coming off major injury. Take Fisher or Joeckel, don’t risk trading back.

  7. 7 TommyLawlor said at 5:02 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    I’ve discussed the trade-back a lot. We’ve got lots of holes to fill. Acquire extra picks if you can…unless you feel a prospect is special. Joeckel is very good. Probably won’t last to #4. Fisher is a notch below to me and a player I’d pass on for the right trade offer.

  8. 8 ezgreene said at 5:05 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    I get the quantity vs. quality argument. I just feel LT isn’t a position you take a chance on a lesser player at. Tomato vs. tomatoe.

  9. 9 TommyLawlor said at 5:17 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    Ironic you say that. Peters was a UDFA and Herremans a 4th round pick.

  10. 10 ezgreene said at 5:18 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    Never look at outliers as norms. Look at the preponderance of LTs. They’re first rounders, no? What did we give up for Peters?

  11. 11 TommyLawlor said at 5:26 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    With Peters in place, though, you can take a chance on a guy and see if he develops. If we had nothing there, I’d completely agree. LT isn’t a must at #4, but it is an option.

  12. 12 ezgreene said at 6:40 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    I love Peters. LOVE Peters. But:
    1. How often are you in a place to get this close to a sure thing at LT?
    2. How can the team be sure he’s “in place” he’s bigger than most humans coming off a serious lower leg injury. There’s a greater than remote chance his return will be problematic.
    3. Fisher (who Jeremiah is quite high on) can play RT for a bit swinging Herremans down then move to LT when needed.

  13. 13 TommyLawlor said at 6:55 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    There is logic in taking them. I don’t dispute that.

  14. 14 Anders said at 8:41 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    There is some good OT prospects in this draft. A guy like Armstead is of interest (and no its not just because of his 40 yard dash.). He is good in pass pro, but just need to add functional strength to better anchor vs bull rush and make better run blocks.

  15. 15 ezgreene said at 11:33 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    @Anders You made my argument for me. You have excellent prospects and “good” prospects. (I’ll overlook your case issue with “there is good prospects”) At LT do you want to drop from an excellent prospect down to a good one? How often will you have a chance to get an excellent LT prospect. YOu get a crack at a good prospect every year.

  16. 16 deg0ey said at 2:22 PM on February 24th, 2013:

    The other way of looking at that is by trying to define your “good” and “excellent” prospects. If your point is that we shouldn’t settle for less than a stud OT, you can look at the difference between “good” and “excellent” prospects as the probability that they develop into a stud OT.

    You could draft a guy at #4 and he turns out to be the next Mike Williams, or you could pick up a UDFA and he’s the next Jason Peters, the draft is all about probabilities.

    Hypothetically, if the Eagles are confident that they can get 2 more seasons out of JP, then they’ve got 3 drafts with which to hit on their stud OT replacement, so they may be able to afford to take their chances on non-first round guys in the hope that one of them turns out to be awesome, safe in the knowledge that they haven’t set the franchise back for years by doing so.

  17. 17 austinfan said at 7:48 AM on February 24th, 2013:

    After watching Joekel, I’m not sold on him as a sure thing.

    He’s an average athlete for LT, which means he may be maxed out as a player. As Mayock said, he was getting beat inside consistently, which usually means a guy is “cheating” to the outside because he lacks the feet to handle the outside speed rush. He may end up as a good but not great RT.

    I didn’t expect him to work out like Lane Johnson, but he also lacks the length of a Tra Thomas.

  18. 18 laeagle said at 4:55 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    Thoughts on whether and how far Jordan falls based on his surgery? Picking him up early in the second would be freaking awesome.

  19. 19 ezgreene said at 4:55 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    Zero point zero chance of that.

  20. 20 TommyLawlor said at 4:59 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    Won’t fall that far unless there are long term medical issues.

  21. 21 deg0ey said at 2:23 PM on February 24th, 2013:

    That won’t happen, but I’d settle for having him fall far enough that we can trade up from the second to grab him.

  22. 22 SleepingDuck said at 5:09 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    If you have 2 players on your board with similar grades, one player at a position that you’re set at and one at a position of need, can you draft for need in that scenario?

  23. 23 TommyLawlor said at 5:16 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    Absolutely. I discussed this the other day. That’s called “stacking the board”. You don’t want major reaches, but the notion of need being entirely ignored is crazy.

  24. 24 D-von said at 5:23 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    I stil stress this. Foles will not be traded. I think this is mostly the media blowing up a non-story. Who trades a young QB with potential for Qbs who look like worst than him

  25. 25 TommyLawlor said at 6:54 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    You could be right. I do think KC is interested. Question is how much the Eagles like him. I don’t think he’s untouchable, but that doesn’t mean his price tag is reasonable.

  26. 26 D-von said at 7:28 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    If I’m Coach Chip. I’m not making move on any QB. Not yet at least. I want to see all the QBs in action before I make a decision. Trading Foles forces the Eagles to draft a QB in a weak QB draft.

  27. 27 D3Keith said at 9:43 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    I think it makes sense for KC’s second. Their third is enticing because it’s basically one more second, but I don’t see the point in trading a QB that you took in last year’s third round who is developmentally one year ahead of any rookie you can get in this year’s third round unless you are absolutely sure he cannot play for you — in which case you have no problem throwing away that development year and starting fresh.

    I think that Chiefs No. 2 has to be the line you draw for Foles. If they get creative, maybe. But you don’t want to be left holding the bag in a year, or midseason, with no QB who can play at all, given Vick’s fragility and age.

  28. 28 Matt Hoover said at 1:20 AM on February 24th, 2013:

    If we got a 3rd and 5th for him and drafted a QB in r5 to go with Vick and Dixon, I might have to say great if the 3rd turns into a player like westbrook and not a tony hunt(I know rb isn’t needed just a reference)

  29. 29 Mac said at 10:16 AM on February 24th, 2013:

    Hey Tommy i know trades like this don’t happen in the real world, but what about trading KC Foles + a 2014 conditional pick for KC’s 2014 1st rounder?

  30. 30 deg0ey said at 2:35 PM on February 24th, 2013:

    I wonder whether Geno running a 4.59 might’ve caught Chip’s eye.

    How about the following?

    Foles + #4 + 2013 6th rounder + Conditional pick in 2014
    #1 + #34

  31. 31 Mike Evitts said at 5:47 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    This is the 1st time I read Iggles blitz and I loved it. Loads of info. Got the link from Billy Smith post. I always enjoyed Smith’s posts from another group but haven’t seen much from him lately. At 54, I’m a long time Eagles fan and football fan also. I use to know all the players from other teams and the college guys coming out. Not so anymore, ’cause I just don’t have the energy or the time to do it. That’s why I enjoyed Smith’s posts and now this info from Tom. I’ll definetly be checking out Iggles Blitz as much as I can. Really good stuff. Keep it up. Go Eagles.

  32. 32 TommyLawlor said at 6:53 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    Welcome. You’ll find lots of good comments here. The posts are okay, too.

  33. 33 GvilleEagleFan said at 2:54 PM on February 24th, 2013:

    Didn’t see the casting call for podcast topic ideas, but I would love to hear you guys talk about Dion Jordan for a show: how valuable he would or wouldn’t be in the new scheme, whether we can take him at #4 or if he’s only a realistic option if we trade back, how far you think we could trade back and still get him, what the opportunity cost of doing so would be, etc. You guys are my top source for Eagles discussion by far, love the show and don’t listen to the haters asking for shorter shows!

  34. 34 D3Keith said at 9:32 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    Ah yes, the first visit to Iggles Blitz.

    It’s like hearing the perfect song for the first time.
    Like biting into the tastiest sandwich.
    Like meeting the one.

    Like winning the Super Bowl … not that I’d know what that feels like.

  35. 35 GvilleEagleFan said at 2:49 PM on February 24th, 2013:

    You should check out their Helmet2Helmet podcast as well, well thought out discussion from a rational perspective unlike Philly-area radio jocks just trying to stir a controversy. Commenting up here also in hopes that Tommy will see this and tell Jimmy that his audio levels are out of whack again, I keep having to turn up the volume to hear him and then Tommy will almost blow my speakers. As always, I’m sure it’s Jimmy’s fault

  36. 36 ACViking said at 7:10 PM on February 23rd, 2013:


    Now that you’ve seen some of the combine performances, along with measurements, I feel obliged to keep you on the hook and ask . . .

    What player at what position selected at No. 4 (can’t assume a trade just yet) will have have the greatest impact on Eagles.

    And if a trade is made, which I assume (from your past remarks) will keep the Eagles in the Top 10 — short of a blockbuster offer involving a No. 1 next year plus a No. 2 this year — do you expect the Eagles are still focusing on the same position to get the biggest impact.

    ASSUMPTION: the players on the draft board are arrayed based on the *stacking* theory you’ve discussed.

    When does the 1st TE come off the board? How high a pick would the Eagles spend on a TE?

  37. 37 TommyLawlor said at 7:22 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    This really depends. I’m working on a new theory now that I’ll share later. Needs to be in a separate post. Nothing genius, but a different slant on things.

    I wish I could give you a definitive answer, but as long as we have so many schematic questions, it is hard for me to feel strongly about my answers.

    I think a TE goes in the 25 to 40 range. I think the Eagles could take one as early as the 2nd, but only if that was a player they truly loved. More realistic is the 4th or 5th round. You can find talented TEs down in that area. Also possible the Eagles will just go the UDFA route since this is a deep class. Should push down some talented prospects.

  38. 38 ACViking said at 7:47 PM on February 23rd, 2013:


    My question about Armstead wasn’t worded well.

    What I meant to ask (using TA and VC as examples) is, “what’s the importance of a very, very fast OT?” As opposed to, say, a DJ Fluke at 5.3 in the 40 ydd.

  39. 39 TommyLawlor said at 8:01 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    Just like Jason Peters in 2011…the ability to get downfield and block. Kelly wants his blockers at the LOS and downfield. He’ll mix in screens, WR screens, and creative run plays. The more mobile the OL, the more effective those types of plays are.

    Also, speed shows good conditioning, which is important to the no-huddle.

  40. 40 Anders said at 8:45 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    Tommy. I heard your pod cast this morning and your comment about guards maybe becoming of more value got me thinking.

    I assume based on everything I know about Kelly and what Kelly and Shurmur have said that we are going to become a run heavy offense. With that I wonder if a guard might have more value than a tackle because of how the guard help clear the middle and is used to pull.

    I hope you understand my line of thoughts, I just have a heard time fully explaining it.

  41. 41 TommyLawlor said at 11:37 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    In a run offense, the OG can become even more important. Your thinking has some logic to it.

    More value than a OT? That’s tough to say. Still must protect the QB soundly.

  42. 42 Anders said at 7:05 AM on February 24th, 2013:

    It was more of an added element to the line of thought you made.

  43. 43 Iskar36 said at 9:53 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    I’m not sure I follow your logic in how the #4 pick is more valuable after today. Seems to me that if you’re a team looking to get an OT, after today, you should feel more confident that you can find one later in the draft rather than be forced to trade up to the draft for one. I would think that had a bunch of the OTs looked bad today, that would have been what benefited us because now teams would feel there are fewer options so they need to trade up to find a good one.

  44. 44 TommyLawlor said at 11:35 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    “Could be more valuable”.

    If those teams covet a top LT…

  45. 45 Iskar36 said at 12:16 AM on February 24th, 2013:

    Sorry, I’m still unclear. So as of a few days ago, there were a couple of LTs that were considered “top” LTs. All the teams that would have been interested in those guys would be in play for a trade to try and get those LTs. After today, the top LTs had good days, but so did several other Olineman. To me, this would reduce the value of the 4th pick. Now, anyone who is looking for a top LT, they still are in play, but no more than they were a few days ago. On the other hand, several teams now can reconsider the need to go after a “top LT” because there were a few guys that looked good today that they can now consider as an alternative option.

    In other words, the supply of decent OTs has increased, therefore teams have more options, thus they are not as forced to trade up for good LT.

    Maybe I am missing an obvious point you are trying to make, but I just don’t see how OTs having a good day increases the value of our pick. I’m not sure it hurts it all that much if there is a team specifically targeting any particular player, I just don’t know that it helps though.

  46. 46 Miami_Adam said at 10:37 AM on February 24th, 2013:

    The point is that all 3 of these LTs are just as good today as they were a month ago. However, now that everyone considers all three to be top-15 picks, any team who wants one of those guys will need to consider moving up, or risk missing out on that top tier.

  47. 47 Iskar36 said at 12:39 PM on February 24th, 2013:

    Again, since two of those guys were already considered top 10 picks, I don’t think that has any positive effect on the value of the Eagles #4 pick. In fact, had Johnson looked terrible, turning the situation into Joeckel being a good top pick and Fisher a good top 10, then no one else near the top of the draft, that is when teams would be more likely to need to trade up to get a top tier guy.

    More guys looking good makes the “resource of top tier LTs” less scarce, therefore reduces the value of the trade, not increases.

  48. 48 CalSFro said at 12:58 PM on February 24th, 2013:

    You’re right, but you can really look at it either way. If there is a “run” on tackles in the top 3 with Joeckel and Fisher both coming off the board, maybe some team panics and offers us a boatload of picks to move up and draft Johnson or Cooper or something. It’s not “likely”, but we’re all just throwing random crap at the wall right now anyways, trying to guess what might stick.

    I think the problem we, as fans, have is that we tend to look at trades after the fact like they were made in a vaccuum. Like no matter what, they were always going to happen. We assign them a value using a point based chart and then try to say immediately who “won” and “lost”.

    But that’s just not the case. Right now, I believe the Eagles when they say they don’t WANT to trade Nick Foles. But if KC offers them their pick at the top of the second round? Or they offer us something crazy like a swap for Tamba Hali or Eric Berry? That’s damn near impossible to say no to. At that point you’re making the trade because it’d be stupid not to. Not necessarily because you’re looking to trade that player.

    So, if we’re sitting at 4 with Joeckel and Fisher both off the board and some team really, really, really loves another prospect at that position…maybe we make a fantastic deal for picks and/or players. Your “demand” is based on the “supply” as perceived by the teams on the board behind you.

    Again, not likely in terms of generic draft scenario projection. But, at this point, no one really knows what is likely.

  49. 49 Iskar36 said at 1:43 PM on February 24th, 2013:

    I see what you’re saying, but two issues with that scenario that make it extremely unlikely. First off, both Joeckel and Fisher need to be taken in the top 3. Joeckel will very likely be a top 4 pick, on the other hand though, while Fisher has certainly impressed, I’m not sure he is a top 3 player. Ignoring that though, the even more unlikely issue with that trade is for a team to want to trade up because they feel Lane Johnson is too good to pass up at #4, especially with the idea that other offensive lineman looked good at the combine. Johnson may have solidified himself as a top 15 player, but by no means did he solidify himself as a top 5.

  50. 50 CalSFro said at 2:59 PM on February 24th, 2013:

    Part of the fun of talking about (obsessing over) the draft is playing out all the scenarios that could happen. We all know that this scenario isn’t likely, but that has nothing to do with whether or not it’s going to happen. The unknown is the human element, which is really what it all boils down to.

    If Jeff Fisher loves Lane Johnson and worries about him going to the Eagles or someone directly after them, that’s all that matters. Not the likelihood of it happening right now. He’ll trade up and we’ll all know that’s how it was supposed to go. Like people always say, it takes just one team to fall in love with a prospect…

  51. 51 Iskar36 said at 3:09 PM on February 24th, 2013:

    Oh, I fully agree with that part, but my original point was about whether this increases the value of our #4 pick. Sure, anything can happen, but incredibly unlikely scenarios do not increase the value of our pick because those incredibly unlikely scenarios were still as incredibly unlikely beforehand.

  52. 52 CalSFro said at 3:47 PM on February 24th, 2013:

    You’re applying value to the pick based on cut and dry, black and white concepts of economics and general ideas of NFL talent evaluation. And that’s a helpful exercise because it allows you to do things like put together the skeletal structure of a potential trade.

    But whether or not you want to factor in the other “unlikely” scenarios, all it takes is one person loving one prospect to buck the so called trends and destroy the priorly perceived value of a pick or player. It happens every year.

  53. 53 deg0ey said at 3:56 PM on February 24th, 2013:

    I don’t think Tommy is trying to suggest that someone trades up for Johnson at #4.

    Looking at CBS mock drafts, last week, Rob Rang had a mock with Joeckel going #1, Fisher at #11 and Johnson at #20. That was pretty unlikely at the time, but pretty much impossible now. Dane Brugler was a little more realistic with his effort; those guys went #4, #7 and #11 respectively.

    Arizona may have felt comfortable that Fisher would fall to them at #7. After their combine performances, it’s not unreasonable to think that Joeckel and Fisher are both off the board when they pick (especially when you consider that two guys consistently mocked in that range, Dion Jordan and Dee Milliner, are scheduled to have knee surgery and will probably fall as a result).

    In that situation, you have Arizona and San Diego who both have desperate needs at OT and only Lane Johnson to split between them. It’s not unreasonable to think that one of them decides to get ahead of the game and move up to #4 to make sure they get one of Joeckel and Fisher rather than staying put and ‘settling’ for Lane (or missing out on the top-3 guys altogether).

  54. 54 austinfan said at 10:10 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    Long didn’t blow me away, 4.63 SS, 7.83 cone, 28″ VT.
    Decent but not outstanding.
    In fact, other than a lot of fast 40s, which are overrated, I didn’t see this group as outstanding, good but not great athletes.

    People forget how good Mathis and Kelce were at the combine, straight line speed is one thing, but the ability to get low and move with agility, in a zone blocking scheme, that’s the killa.

  55. 55 TommyLawlor said at 11:39 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    He’s not a great athlete, but watch the guy’s tape and you see plenty of athletic ability.

  56. 56 ceteris_paribus1776 said at 5:25 PM on February 24th, 2013:

    This is why the swatch-watch, ruler, and protractor are overrated!

  57. 57 RC5000 said at 11:51 PM on February 23rd, 2013:

    TE Toilolo could be a great fit for Kelly’s offense both in the running and passing game and Kelly can work with him. The concept behind the izr and ozr is to spread the DL and defense out and blocking is the foundation.
    He loves to spread it out, dictate running the ball and then go over the top.
    He also will be a tremendous threat in the red zone.

  58. 58 Matt Hoover said at 1:23 AM on February 24th, 2013:

    Tommy, would love you thoughts S Kenny Vaccaro, best safety since Earl Thomas in the draft imo, maybe we do trade back, could we take Kenny? Would be a huge upgrade at S imo. Also wondering your thoughts on Jake Stoneburner as a day 3 TE target, coming out of HS he was a highly regarded player until the woes of playing in that awful Ohio State Passing Attack where the TE is hardly covered happen, also peeing on a wall? I don’t see NFL teams worried about that.

  59. 59 GermanEagle said at 3:13 AM on February 24th, 2013:

    Re chiefs open to trading 1st OVR:

    The more I think about it, the more I see the Chiefs and Eagles swapping their first round picks, with the Chiefs throwing in their third rounder to acquire Foles.

    The Eagles then can pick Luke Joeckel or trade away their first overall for more picks.

  60. 60 Vinícius Gonçalves said at 10:18 AM on February 24th, 2013:

    Some people saying Barkley´s stock is rising and that Chiefs will not take Geno. Maybe we can trade back with some teams like the Cardinals, Bills or Jets that could be targeting one of these QBs. Imagine best scenario would be trading #4 for Cardinals to get Geno Smith and then trading #7 with Jets for them to get Barkley. #dream

  61. 61 pjxii said at 11:50 AM on February 24th, 2013:

    Tommy, any thoughts on Da’Rick Rodgers? I don’t see Jeremy Maclin staying here past next season unless he does a major overhaul to his style of play. Rodgers is a big, tough son-of-a-gun who will block and holds on to the ball no matter how hard he gets hit.

  62. 62 Anders said at 3:01 PM on February 24th, 2013:

    I love Rogers, but he got some character concerns. He would be great value in the top of the 3rd

  63. 63 Chris said at 11:58 AM on February 24th, 2013:

    Hey Tommy,

    Love your posts and insight into players, schemes, etc. I also enjoy your helmet to helmet show with Jimmy Bama. I know you guys are constantly working on improving the show and I had one suggestion. Your sound volume is great but Jimmy Bama sounds like he is talking from another room. Thanks for all the articles and podcasts they are funny and very informative.

  64. 64 Alex Karklins said at 1:15 PM on February 24th, 2013:

    I have a feeling Geno Smith’s 40 time got Chip Kelly’s attention.

  65. 65 holeplug said at 3:38 PM on February 24th, 2013:

    Would have to. I was expecting like a 4.8 lol. Around the same speed as Kapernick and Russell Wilson ran. Still think Andy takes him #1 anyway.

  66. 66 ACViking said at 1:49 PM on February 24th, 2013:

    Re: Geno Smith’s fast 40


    After reading about GS’s sub-4.6 time in the 40, I had these questions:

    Does GS play slower than his 40 time? That is, should we stick to what his film shows?

    Would a different drill (3-cone?) be a better indicator?

    Same questions for EJ Manuel.

    Does he play slower — or about to — his 40 time?

    Is that was his film shows?

  67. 67 Phils Goodman said at 3:33 PM on February 24th, 2013:

    These numbers shouldn’t really change the evaluation on Geno Smith’s skills (unless you were one to drastically underrate his athleticism to begin with). I still see him as a QB with plus mobility (not special mobility) who could run a functional QB wrap off the zone read, rather than a deadly one.

    It does show that he’s got a chip on his shoulder from all this draft talk and has been training his butt off to show that he should be a top pick, though.

  68. 68 RC5000 said at 4:45 PM on February 24th, 2013:

    Agree. Geno did very well as he should have like everyone. The question is always why players don’t train their butt off if there isn’t an injury.
    At 6-2, 218 4.59 is really good for a QB but it’s not that eye popping considering they train and he was always a good runner and had good athleticism.