Search Results

This detailed analysis of the New England Patriots' current situation considers the once-unthinkable prospect of moving on from legendary coach Bill Belichick. With a dismal 2-10 record under Belichick, the worst at this point in his tenure, the Patriots are facing a significant crossroads. This decline, highlighted by an NFL-worst five-game losing streak and historical low points, has brought the team to a critical juncture. Rebuilding The New England Patriots: Do The Patriots Move On From Bill Belichick, Draft A QB? Kraft's Crucial Decision: Belichick's Future and Legacy As owner Robert Kraft contemplates the future of his signature franchise, he faces the daunting task of possibly replacing Belichick, who is just 17 victories shy of surpassing Don Shula’s record as the winningest coach in NFL history. This decision echoes past moments in NFL history where iconic coaches like Chuck Noll, Tom Landry, and Shula himself faced the end of their illustrious careers. 2024 Draft Strategy: Eyeing a Franchise Quarterback The Patriots' struggle extends beyond coaching, with a significant focus on their performance in the upcoming 2024 NFL Draft, where they potentially hold the 2nd overall pick. This position opens the possibility of drafting a franchise quarterback, with top prospects like Caleb Williams or Drake Maye on the radar, addressing one of the team's most pressing needs. Belichick's Legacy vs. Team Rebuild: A Historic Decision In this context, Belichick's future, coupled with the team's draft strategy and significant cap space, forms the crux of the Patriots' potential rebuilding strategy. Whether Belichick stays to chase the record or Kraft opts for a fresh start, the decision will be a historic and possibly transformative one for the franchise. Comprehensive Analysis of the Patriots' Current Situation Below is an analysis of the Patriot's current situation. The analysis covers all aspects to be considered when rebuilding an NFL franchise, including stats overview, pending free agency ahead of the 2024 offseason, NFL Draft & free agency team needs, top player grades, and more. New England Patriots Season Stats Overview Patriots Year Over Year Offensive Points Per Game 2022 : The Patriots averaged 21.4 points per game. 2023 : The Patriots averaged 13.0 points per game. New England Patriots Yards Per Game: 2022 vs. 2023 2022 Performance: Yards per Game: 314.6 2023 Performance: Yards per Game: 291.4 New England Patriots Opponents' Points Per Game: 2022 vs. 2023 2022 Performance: Opponents' Points per Game: 20.4 2023 Performance: Opponents' Points per Game: 20.9 New England Patriots Opponent Yards Per Game: 2022 vs. 2023 2022 Performance: Opponent Yards per Game: 322.0 2023 Performance: Opponent Yards per Game: 306.9 New England Patriots Projected Team Needs Analysis QB, OT, WR, TE, CB, EDGE, DL New England Patriots 2024 Salary Cap Space Analysis Base Salary Cap (2024) : $242,000,000 Team's Active Cap Spending (2024) : $160,507,571 Dead Money (2024) : $7,983,623 2024 Calculated Salary Cap The calculated salary cap space for the New England Patriots in 2024 is approximately  $73,508,806. This figure aligns closely with the provided cap space of $75,321,858. The slight difference might be due to additional factors like carryover and adjustments not accounted for in the basic calculation. 2024 Effective Salary Cap Space The effective cap space for the Patriots in 2024, which accounts for signing at least 51 players and the projected rookie class, is $61,769,140 . This figure is lower than the basic cap space calculation, reflecting the costs of maintaining a full roster and incoming rookies. Key Potential Free Agents for the Patriots in 2024 Hunter Henry (TE) Type : UFA (Unrestricted Free Agent) Age : 30 Snaps : 74.5% Current APY : $12,500,000 Guarantees : $25,000,000 Trent Brown (RT) Type : Void Age : 31 Snaps : 68.0% Current APY : $6,500,000 Kendrick Bourne (WR) Type : UFA Age : 29 Snaps : 48.0% Current APY : $5,000,000 Mike Gesicki (TE) Type : UFA Age : 29 Snaps : 48.5% Current APY : $4,500,000 Ezekiel Elliott (RB) Type : UFA Age : 29 Snaps : 38.4% Current APY : $3,000,000 Kyle Dugger (S) Type : UFA Age : 28 Snaps : 97.1% Current APY : $2,082,976 Michael Onwenu (LG) Type : UFA Age : 27 Snaps : 74.1% Current APY : $874,367 Top Graded Patriots Players (PFF Grades) Jahlani Tavai (LB) PFF Grade : 87.8 Free Agent in 2024 : No Positional Strength : Strong in run defense and good coverage skills. Pharaoh Brown (TE) PFF Grade : 85.1 Free Agent in 2024 : Yes Positional Strength : Exceptional receiving and blocking capabilities. Jabrill Peppers (S) PFF Grade : 84.9 Free Agent in 2024 : No Positional Strength : Versatile safety, strong in run support and coverage. Mack Wilson Sr. (LB) PFF Grade : 82.0 Free Agent in 2024 : No Positional Strength : Versatile linebacker with ability to cover and support in run defense. Alex Austin (CB) PFF Grade : 82.4 Free Agent in 2024 : No Positional Strength : Excellent in coverage, good ball skills. Christian Gonzalez (CB) PFF Grade : 80.8 Free Agent in 2024 : No Positional Strength : Good speed, agility in coverage, and potential in man-to-man defense. Trent Brown (T) PFF Grade : 81.0 Free Agent in 2024 : Yes (Void) Positional Strength : Dominant in pass protection and run blocking. Jonathan Jones (CB) PFF Grade : 75.0 Free Agent in 2024 : No Positional Strength : Strong in coverage, especially in slot defense. David Andrews (C) PFF Grade : 74.6 Free Agent in 2024 : No Positional Strength : Reliable in pass protection, strong leadership and communication skills. Christian Barmore (DI) PFF Grade : 74.5 Free Agent in 2024 : No Positional Strength : Effective interior pass rusher, strong against the run. Rhamondre Stevenson (HB) PFF Grade : 71.3 Free Agent in 2024 : No Positional Strength : Powerful runner, good in pass protection, and capable receiver. Matthew Judon (ED) PFF Grade : 70.2 Free Agent in 2024 : No Positional Strength : Excellent edge rusher, strong in setting the edge against the run. Ezekiel Elliott (HB) PFF Grade : 69.3 Free Agent in 2024 : Yes (UFA) Positional Strength : Strong, consistent runner with good vision and receiving ability. Conor McDermott (T) PFF Grade : 69.7 Free Agent in 2024 : No Positional Strength : Solid in both run blocking and pass protection. Cole Strange (G) PFF Grade : 65.3 Free Agent in 2024 : No Positional Strength : Shows potential in pass protection and run blocking. Hunter Henry (TE) PFF Grade : 65.1 Free Agent in 2024 : Yes (UFA) Positional Strength : Reliable target in passing game, solid blocker. 2023 Season Overview Record : 3-10 Division : AFC East Scoring Points Scored : 169 (Ranked 31st) Points Allowed : 272 (Tied for 16th) PFF Team Grades Overall : 29th Offense : 28th Defense : Tied for 19th Special Teams : Tied for 24th Final Analysis Overall Performance: Ranked 29th overall, the team is performing poorly compared to the rest of the league. This low ranking indicates significant issues across the board. Offensive Struggles: With an offense ranked 28th, the team has been ineffective in scoring. The low points scored (169, 31st in the league) further highlight this issue. This could be due to various problems, including quarterback performance, offensive line issues, or ineffective play-calling. Defensive Performance: The defense is ranked tied for 19th, below average but not as poor as the offense. The points allowed (272, tied for 16th) suggest that the defense is performing at a mediocre level, being relatively better at preventing scores than the league average. Special Teams: The special teams unit, tied for 24th, is also underperforming. This could impact the team's field position and overall game management, contributing to the poor record. Record and Divisional Context: With a 3-10 record in the competitive AFC East, the team is likely struggling against strong divisional opponents. This record indicates that they are not competitive this season. Conclusion Rebuilding The New England Patriots The team's overall poor performance in the 2023 season can be attributed to significant offensive shortcomings, a below-average defense, and underperforming special teams. To improve, the team needs to address these areas, potentially looking at coaching strategies, player personnel changes, or adjustments in their game plan. The end of the season might also bring about considerations for draft strategies, trades, or free agency moves to bolster weak areas.

The Chicago Bears' performance analysis for the 2023 season and strategic outlook for 2024 reveals a team in transition with potential for significant growth. On offense, the Bears showed modest improvement, increasing their points per game from 19.2 in 2022 to 20.8 in 2023 and their yards per game from 307.8 to 324.2. This upward trend, though slight, indicates an offense finding its rhythm. Defensively, the Bears made notable strides, reducing opponent points per game from 27.2 to 23.8, and slashing yards allowed dramatically from 375.9 to 314.5, signaling a robust defensive turnaround. Heading into the 2024 season, the Bears are well-positioned financially, boasting a healthy cap space of $64.8 million. With effective cap space at $40.8 million and minimal dead money, they have ample opportunity to make strategic moves. With only 37 players currently under contract, the Bears must prioritize filling crucial positions through free agency and the draft, balancing the need for immediate impact players with long-term financial sustainability. Key potential free agents include impact players like Yannick Ngakoue and Justin Jones, alongside others who could bolster both offense and defense. Chicago Bears Free Agent and Salary Cap Analysis for 2024 Season Salary Cap Overview: Cap Space : The Bears have a robust  $64,785,906  in cap space, providing significant leeway for roster adjustments and strategic acquisitions. Effective Cap Space : At  $40,832,783 , this figure shows the Bears' financial capacity after accounting for a minimum of 51 players, including the projected rookie class, highlighting ample room for additional signings. Active Cap Spending : Currently,  $181,385,752  is allocated towards active roster salaries. Dead Money : A minimal amount of  $859,071  in dead money showcases efficient cap management, freeing up more resources for active roster spending. Roster Size : With 37 players under contract for 2024, below the full roster size of 51, the Bears have multiple spots to fill, opening up opportunities in free agency and the draft. Strategic Salary Cap Considerations: Prioritize filling crucial positional needs, particularly where the draft may lack depth. Actively engage in free agency to complement the draft strategy, given several roster spots to fill. Utilize the low dead money for additional financial flexibility, possibly through contract restructuring. Balance high-value signings with maintaining cap space for future seasons. Key Potential Free Agents: Yannick Ngakoue (EDGE) : UFA with a significant snap count of 73.7%, aged 29. Current APY:  $10,500,000 . A pivotal defensive player essential for maintaining a strong pass rush. Justin Jones (IDL) : UFA with 63.0% snaps, aged 28. Current APY:  $6,000,000 . Key to the interior defense, making him a valuable asset for the Bears' defensive line. Lucas Patrick (LG) : UFA with an 83.5% snap count, aged 31. Current APY:  $4,000,000 . Critical for the offensive line, especially in protecting the QB and supporting the running game. Cairo Santos (K) : Void contract, contributing 34.8% snaps, aged 33. Current APY:  $3,000,000 . A crucial player in special teams whose performance can influence crucial game outcomes. Robert Tonyan (TE) : UFA with 24.1% snaps, aged 30. Current APY:  $2,650,000 . Role as TE could be pivotal depending on his performance in the passing game. Jaylon Johnson (CB) : UFA with 78.6% snaps, aged 25. Current APY:  $1,617,194 . A young cornerback vital for maintaining secondary stability. Darnell Mooney (WR) : UFA with 72.6% snaps, aged 27. Current APY:  $894,262 . Significant to the Bears' receiving corps, potentially a key re-signing for the offense. Potential Offseason Team Positional Needs and Analysis: The Bears' substantial cap space positions them favorably to address key needs identified for the 2024 season. These needs include vital positions such as QB, WR, OT, EDGE, and DL. The financial flexibility combined with strategic signings and draft picks will be crucial in shaping a competitive roster for the upcoming season. PFF Player Grade Overview Jaylon Johnson (CB)  - PFF Grade: 90.6 (2024 Free Agent) DJ Moore (WR) - PFF Grade: 87.8 Noah Sewell (LB)  - PFF Grade: 86.5 T.J. Edwards (LB)  - PFF Grade: 79.5 D'Onta Foreman (HB)  - PFF Grade: 76.9 (2024 Free Agent) Montez Sweat (ED)  - PFF Grade: 75.5 Justin Fields (QB) - PFF Grade: 75.1 Teven Jenkins (G)  - PFF Grade: 74.4 Marcedes Lewis (TE)  - PFF Grade: 73.5 (2024 Free Agent) Khalil Herbert (HB)  - PFF Grade: 77.2 Summary Analysis And Recommendations To Help Improve The Team  As indicated by the PFF data and statistics, the Chicago Bears' performance in the 2023 season highlights several areas needing improvement for greater competitiveness in the NFC North and the NFL. Defensive Challenges (Ranked 30th) : The defense is a significant concern, ranked 30th in the league. This low ranking and the high number of points allowed (309, tied for 24th) suggest critical weaknesses in stopping opposing offenses. Addressing this will require a focus on acquiring impact players in the defensive line and secondary, either through the draft or free agency. Evaluating and potentially adjusting defensive schemes could also be beneficial. Offensive Improvements (Ranked 20th) : While performing better than the defense, the offense still has room for improvement. Enhancing the offensive line to protect the quarterback better and create effective running lanes should be a priority. Enhancing the receiver group could also help increase the team's points scored. Special Teams (Ranked 17th) : This mid-tier ranking suggests a balanced performance with room for improvement. Upgrading specialist positions and improving coverage units can contribute to better field position and impact the outcome of games. Overall Team Strategy : The Bears should focus on drafting defensive players, particularly in positions like EDGE, LB, or CB. Using available cap space judiciously in free agency to fill roster gaps, especially on defense, is crucial. Investing in developing young players, particularly in underperforming positions, is also essential. Coaching and Schemes : The coaching staff needs to reassess their strategies on both offense and defense, maximizing the talents of the current roster and making necessary adjustments to improve overall team performance.

The 2024 NFL Draft is swiftly approaching, and we are meticulously analyzing each NFL team to pinpoint their specific needs. This process involves a thorough evaluation of the talent available in the draft, helping to determine which positions teams are likely to prioritize early on. Our analysis provides a detailed breakdown of players rated on the Football Scout 365 NFL Draft board. The objective is to map out the distribution of players by position, assess the average grade for each position group, and then align this information with the projected 2024 team needs across the NFL. Click here to check out the Football Scout 365 NFL Draft Board . Overview of the Analysis: 2024 NFL Draft: Measuring Positional Value Considering the abundant talent in positions such as Wide Receiver (WR), Cornerback (CB), and Offensive Tackle (OT), teams needing to strengthen these areas have the flexibility to use their highest draft picks on them. However, the situation is more challenging for teams desperately in need of a Quarterback (QB). These teams may need a more strategic approach, possibly considering trades or exploring free agency options. Team Needs Analysis Frequent needs across NFL teams include: Edge Defenders (EDGE) Cornerbacks (CB) Wide Receivers (WR) Offensive Tackles (OT) Interior Defensive Linemen (IDL) Teams looking to bolster their defensive line should prioritize these positions early in the draft due to high quality and limited depth. Conversely, for positions with less demand, such as Safety (S), Linebacker (LB), and Running Back (RB), the strategy may involve a mix of selecting the best available talent and addressing specific team needs, particularly in the mid to late rounds of the draft. Percentage Of Player Graded By Position Group Most Represented Positions : Wide Receivers (15.32%), Quarterbacks (11.29%), and Cornerbacks (10.48%) have the highest representation. Highest Average Grades : Offensive Tackles (65.27), Wide Receivers (65.58), and Cornerbacks (65.92) show high average grades, indicating quality talent. Wide Receivers (WR): 15.32% Quarterbacks (QB): 11.29% Cornerbacks (CB): 10.48% Safeties (S): 9.68% Running Backs (RB): 8.87% Offensive Tackles (OT): 8.06% Tight Ends (TE): 8.06% Linebackers (LB): 8.06% Edge Defenders (ED): 7.26% Interior Defensive Linemen (IDL): 6.45% Average Grade By Position Group High-Value Positions : Given the high demand and strong talent pool, positions like WR, CB, and OT may hold significant value in this draft. Moderate-Value Positions : QB, despite being essential, may not be as highly valued given the lower overall grade and fewer teams needing them. Lower-Value Positions : Positions with either less demand or weaker talent pools, like TE or LB, might be lower in draft value. ED (Edge Defender): 66.07 Laiatu Latu, UCLA Grade: 66.88 Ceiling: High-End Starter Potential IDL (Interior Defensive Lineman): 66.02 T'Vondre Sweat, Texas Grade: 68.57 Ceiling: High-End Starter Potential CB (Cornerback): 65.92 Cooper DeJean, Iowa Grade: 75.31 Ceiling: Elite WR (Wide Receiver): 65.58 Marvin Harrison Jr., Ohio State Grade: 75.32 Ceiling: Elite S (Safety): 62.67 Kamren Kinchens, Miami Grade: 68.44 Ceiling: High-End Starter Potential OT (Offensive Tackle): 65.27 Joe Alt, Notre Dame Grade: 77.82 Ceiling: Elite TE (Tight End): 63.09 Brock Bowers, Georgia Grade: 75.38 Ceiling: Elite RB (Running Back): 62.92 TreVeyon Henderson, Ohio State Grade: 66.00 Ceiling: High-End Starter Potential QB (Quarterback): 62.24 Caleb Williams, USC Grade: 73.82 Ceiling: Near Elite LB (Linebacker): 61.57 Edgerrin Cooper, Texas A&M Grade: 61.56 Ceiling: Mid-Level Starter Potential IOL (Interior Offensive Lineman): 61.36 Jackson Powers-Johnson, Oregon State Grade: 62.18 Ceiling: Mid-Level Starter Potential Averages by Conference Big Ten : High representation and quality (Marvin Harrison Jr., WR, 75.3 grade). SEC : Notably strong players (Brock Bowers, TE, 75.3 grade). Other conferences : Notable talent like Joe Alt, OT, with a 77.8 grade. BIG TEN Conference: Percentage of Players: 30.65% Average Grade for BIG TEN Players: Approximately 63.25 Top-Graded Player: Marvin Harrison Jr., Ohio State (WR) Grade: 75.3 Ceiling: Elite SEC Conference: Percentage of Players: 20.97% Average Grade for SEC Players: Approximately 64.10 Top-Graded Player: Brock Bowers, Georgia (TE) Grade: 75.3 Ceiling: Elite ACC Conference: Percentage of Players: 18.55% Average Grade for ACC Players: Approximately 63.69 Top-Graded Player: Keon Coleman, Florida State (WR) Grade: 75.1 Ceiling: Elite PAC 12 Conference: Percentage of Players: 18.55% Average Grade for PAC 12 Players: Approximately 62.31 Top-Graded Player: Caleb Williams, USC (QB) Grade: 73.8 Ceiling: Near Elite BIG 12 Conference: Percentage of Players: 10.48% Average Grade for BIG 12 Players: Approximately 62.69 Top-Graded Player: T'Vondre Sweat, Texas (IDL) Grade: 68.5 Ceiling: High-End Starter Potential Other Conferences: Percentage of Players: 5.65% Average Grade for Players from Other Conferences: Approximately 64.47 Top-Graded Player: Joe Alt, Notre Dame (OT) Grade: 77.8 Ceiling: High-End Starter Potential

Tis the season, we have a list, we are checking it once, we are checking it twice. We have updated the 2024 NFL Draft Big Board from 50 prospects to now include 100 prospects. That means we are getting closer to the start of the NFL Draft season. Some Notes About The NFL Draft Big Board Update A few things to consider with this recent update. We still have to monitor and remove draft-eligible players that have yet to declare. I left a few in the rankings that are on the fence because we all know 20-year-old kids can change their minds at any moment. Top 100 Big Board Rankings Click here to view the actual top 100 Big Board. Or you can scroll through the updated top 10 of the player rankings, but I advise you to check out the more in-depth draft board that includes each player's play style and scheme fit, player comparisons, and more. Below Are the Updated Top 10 Players Based On Their 2023 Grades. No grade is final, but we have completed 80% of the process as we await the NFL Combine and Pro Day season. Enjoy!  1). Marvin Harrison Jr. Position:  WR School:  Ohio State Play Style/Scheme:  Harrison Jr. is a prototypical outside receiver known for his precise route-running and reliable hands. He excels in schemes that leverage his ability to create separation and his understanding of defensive coverages, making him a consistent threat in various passing situations. 2). Joe Alt Position:  OT School:  Notre Dame Play Style/Scheme:  Alt's athleticism and technique shine in pass protection and run blocking. He's adaptable to various offensive line schemes, particularly those that value agile and technically sound tackles. His ability to handle speed rushers and his strength in the run game make him a versatile offensive line prospect. 3). Brock Bowers Position:  TE School:  Georgia Play Style/Scheme:  Bowers is a versatile, athletic tight end who excels in both the passing game and blocking. His scheme fit includes offenses that utilize the tight end as a primary receiver, given his route-running skills, speed, and ability to create mismatches against linebackers and safeties. 4). Keon Coleman Position:  WR School:  Florida State Play Style/Scheme:  Coleman is characterized as a "throwback" physical receiver with excellent body control and catching ability. His play style fits well in vertical passing offenses that leverage his size and ability to win contested catches. 5). Cooper DeJean Position:  CB School:  Iowa Play Style/Scheme:  DeJean's traits and style make him an ideal fit in defensive schemes that require versatile cornerbacks. He excels in zone coverage with his instinctive play and ball skills but also shows promise in man-to-man situations due to his agility and speed. 6). Caleb Williams Position:  QB School:  USC Play Style/Scheme:  Williams is an electrifying dual-threat quarterback with a strong arm and mobility. He fits best in offensive systems that can capitalize on his ability to make plays both in and outside of the pocket, utilizing his dynamic playmaking skills. 7). Olumuyiwa Fashanu Position:  OT School:  Penn State Play Style/Scheme:  Fashanu exhibits a play style characterized as technically sound and physically imposing. He is suited for offensive schemes that require reliable pass protection and effective run blocking, as he demonstrates proficiency in both areas. 8). J.C. Latham Position:  OT School:  Alabama Play Style/Scheme:  Latham, while still evolving as a player, possesses a blend of size, strength, and agility. He's a fit for offensive line schemes that value versatile tackles capable of excelling in both pass protection and run blocking. 9). Drake Maye Position:  QB School:  North Carolina Play Style/Scheme:  Maye is a mobile pocket passer with a strong arm and good decision-making skills. His best fit is in an offensive scheme that blends traditional pocket passing with the ability to extend plays and make throws on the move. 10). Laiatu Latu Position:  ED School:  UCLA Play Style/Scheme:  Latu's play style is characterized by his physicality and ability to disrupt the backfield. He is well-suited for defensive schemes that emphasize aggressive edge rushing and require players to be effective in both pass rush and run defense.

2024 All NFL Draft 1st Team Defense We have completed the 2023 college football regular season and are on a collision course headed toward the 2024 NFL Draft.  Below, we have our 2024 All-NFL Draft 1st team defense. We chose these players using our internal grading system and 2023 performance.  A quick note:   Some of the following players have remaining eligibility and have yet to declare for the 2024 NFL Draft. We included these players anyway because if they do declare, they would be ranked at the top of their NFL Draft positional rankings . Cooper DeJean, Iowa, CB Play Style/Scheme : Ideal for zone and off-man schemes. Versatile in various alignments, explosive athleticism, and rapid closing speed. Kool-Aid McKinstry, Alabama, CB Play Style/Scheme : Excellent in zone coverage, effective in bump and run, notable ball skills, and strong tackling ability. Fits well in complex zone coverage systems. Mike Sainristil, Michigan, Nickel Play Style/Scheme : Adept in nickel and press coverage, effective against slot receivers, showcasing athleticism and quickness. Jared Verse, Florida State, ED Play Style/Scheme : Multifaceted edge rusher, adaptable in 4-3 and 3-4 defenses, mirroring players like Josh Sweat and Nick Bosa. Ideal for teams prioritizing quarterback pressures. Laiatu Latu, UCLA, ED Play Style/Scheme : Known for explosive quickness and adept hand usage, making him a formidable pass rusher. Fits best in odd front schemes, thriving as an edge rusher with the ability to set the edge against the run.  Jer'Zhan Newton, Illinois, IDL Play Style/Scheme : Suited for modern, versatile schemes prioritizing quickness. Best as a 3-tech or in hybrid fronts, potential dynamic playmaker. T'Vondre Sweat, Texas, IDL Play Style/Scheme : Strong run-stopper, ideal for run defense schemes. Potential rotational player with development in pass-rushing techniques. Edgerrin Cooper, Texas A&M, LB Play Style/Scheme : Modern linebacker, fitting well in a weakside role. Length, diagnostic skills, and versatility in various schemes. Danny Stutsman, Oklahoma, LB Play Style/Scheme : Tough, instinctive, and effective in off-ball roles. Best fit in a 4-3 scheme as a weakside linebacker. Kamren Kinchens, Miami, S Play Style/Scheme : Versatile safety, excelling in both man and zone schemes. Effective in pass coverage and run defense. Tyler Nubin, Minnesota, S Play Style/Scheme : Physical, strong in run defense. Ideal as a zone slot/nickel safety or in two-high safety alignments.

2024 All NFL Draft 1st Team Offense We have completed the 2023 college football regular season and are on a collision course headed toward the 2024 NFL Draft.  Below, we have our 2024 All-NFL Draft 1st team offense. We chose these players using our internal grading system and 2023 performance.  A quick note:   Some of the following players have remaining eligibility and have yet to declare for the 2024 NFL Draft. We included these players anyway because if they do declare, they would be ranked at the top of their NFL Draft positional rankings . Caleb Williams, USC, QB Play Style/Scheme :  Electrifying dual-threat quarterback adept at both pocket passing and scrambling. Suited for rollout and option-heavy offenses, comparable to Patrick Mahomes and Kyler Murray in style. TreVeyon Henderson, Ohio State, RB Play Style/Scheme :  Dynamic and versatile running back, effective in both rushing and receiving aspects of the game. Fits well in modern, multifaceted offenses. Marvin Harrison Jr., Ohio State, WR Play Style/Scheme :  Prototypical outside receiver, excels in vertical passing offenses and red zone scenarios. Skilled in contested catches and suitable for a West Coast system. Keon Coleman, Florida State, WR Play Style/Scheme :  Physical "X receiver" with elite ball skills, proficient at high-point catches and combatting press coverage. Effective as a run blocker, contributing to overall utility on the field. Rome Odunze, Washington, WR Play Style/Scheme :  Deep-threat receiver with reliable hands, suited for vertical passing and West Coast offenses. Utilizes a blend of size and speed for matchups. Malik Nabers, LSU, WR Play Style/Scheme :  Versatile receiver, effective both inside and outside. Excellent route runner and adept after the catch, fits well in offenses with short passes and timing routes. Brock Bowers, Georgia, TE Play Style/Scheme :  Athletic tight end with versatility in passing and running game. Comparable to top NFL tight ends, fits schemes valuing pass-catching abilities and red zone presence. Joe Alt, Notre Dame, OT Play Style/Scheme :  Athletic and technically skilled, ideal for zone-blocking schemes. Effective in outside-zone run schemes and proficient in pass-blocking. Olumuyiwa Fashanu, Penn State, OT Play Style/Scheme :  Power-based offensive tackle with exceptional athleticism, adaptable to various schemes. Shines in power-running offenses, drawing comparisons to notable NFL tackles. Jackson Powers-Johnson, Oregon, Center Play Style/Scheme : Powers-Johnson is a robust and technically sound player, ideal for power run schemes. Cooper Beebe, Kansas State, IOL Play Style/Scheme :  Best suited for inside zone schemes, leveraging power in confined spaces. Effective in gap/power schemes due to his pulling ability. Zak Zinter, Michigan, IOL Play Style/Scheme :  Robust and aggressive in run blocking, well-suited for zone-heavy schemes. Demonstrates impressive initial push and skilled hand placement.

The 2023 college football conference championship weekend is pivotal for some of the top 2024 NFL draft prospects competing. With 11 title games across the Power 5, Group of 5 conferences, and an FCS matchup, the stakes are high for College Football Playoff implications and individual players aiming to elevate their draft stock. We selected a few prospects with the most to gain this week from each matchup. Power 5 Championship Players to Watch Pac-12: Oregon at Washington Date & Time : Friday, 8 p.m. ET (ABC) Bo Nix, QB, Oregon Strengths : Accuracy, decision-making, mobility. 2023 Performance : [Details of his performance, such as passing yards, touchdowns, etc.] Draft Projection : Day 2 prospect, potentially second or third round. Michael Penix Jr., QB, Washington Strengths : Superior arm strength, ability to make plays from the pocket. 2023 Performance : 3,899 passing yards, 32 TD passes. Draft Projection : Day 2 prospect, known for big-play potential. Rome Odunze, WR, Washington Strengths : Physicality, aggressive after-the-catch, big-play ability. 2023 Performance : 73 receptions, 1,326 yards, 13 touchdowns. Draft Projection : Potential top-15 pick. Big 12: Oklahoma State at Texas Date & Time : Saturday, 12 p.m. ET (ABC) Xavier Worthy, WR, Texas Strengths : Start-stop quickness, burst with the ball in hands, downfield threat. 2023 Performance : 67 receptions, 883 yards. Draft Projection : Top-32 player, highly sought after for explosive play ability. T'Vondre Sweat, DT, Texas Strengths : Size, strength, run stopping. 2023 Performance : 15 run stops, impactful in the middle. Draft Projection : Top-60 prospect, rising in ranks. Byron Murphy II, DT, Texas Strengths : Explosiveness, penetration ability. 2023 Performance : 11 pressures, five sacks. Draft Projection : Top-60 prospect, gaining attention for disruptive plays. SEC: Georgia at Alabama Date & Time : Saturday, 4 p.m. ET (CBS) Dallas Turner, EDGE, Alabama Strengths : Consistent pass-rushing, ability to create pressure. 2023 Performance : 8 sacks, 38 pressures. Draft Projection : Top-10 player, elite defensive prospect. Chris Braswell, EDGE, Alabama Strengths : Edge rushing, forcing turnovers. 2023 Performance : 8 sacks, 3 forced fumbles. Draft Projection : Early to middle Day 2 prospect. Amarius Mims, OT, Georgia Strengths : Size, pass protection, resilience post-surgery. 2023 Performance : Allowed only five pressures, no sacks. Draft Projection : Top-15 prospect, potential first-round pick. Big Ten: Michigan at Iowa Date & Time : Saturday, 8 p.m. ET (Fox) J.J. McCarthy, QB, Michigan Strengths : Creation ability, underneath passing. 2023 Performance : [Details of his performance, such as passing yards, touchdowns, etc.] Draft Projection : Top-20 player, fourth QB prospect. Kris Jenkins, DT, Michigan Strengths : Run defense and pass-rushing potential. 2023 Performance : Two tackles for loss. Draft Projection : Early- to mid-day two prospect, developing skills. ACC: Louisville at Florida State Date & Time : Saturday, 8 p.m. ET (ABC) Jared Verse, EDGE, Florida State Strengths : Speed-to-power pass rushing, run defense. 2023 Performance : 7 sacks, impactful in recent games. Draft Projection : Top-20 pick, potential to rise in ranks. Keon Coleman, WR, Florida State Strengths : Physicality at the catch point, explosiveness after the catch. 2023 Performance : 11 touchdowns on 46 catches. Draft Projection : Top-10 player, notable for big-play ability. Non-Power Five Championship Players To Watch Conference USA: New Mexico State at Liberty Date & Time : Friday, 7 p.m. ET (CBS Sports) X'Zauvea Gadlin, G, Liberty Strengths : Versatility on the offensive line, strong run-blocking. 2023 Performance : Consistent starting experience, no sacks allowed. Draft Projection : Day 3 pick, solid blocker with experience. MAC: Miami-Ohio at Toledo Date & Time : Saturday, noon ET (ESPN) Quinyon Mitchell, CB, Toledo Strengths : Breakup ability, coverage skills. 2023 Performance : Leads FBS in pass breakups. Draft Projection : Late-Day 2 or early-Day three pick, strong in coverage. Mountain West: Boise State at UNLV Date & Time : Saturday, 3 p.m. ET (Fox) Ricky White, WR, UNLV Strengths : Deep-ball tracking, open-field playmaking. 2023 Performance : 1,300 receiving yards, 7 touchdowns. Draft Projection : Midround pick, potential to return to school. AAC: SMU at Tulane Date & Time : Saturday, 4 p.m. ET (ABC) Michael Pratt, QB, Tulane Strengths : Toughness, playmaking under pressure. 2023 Performance : Tulane's career passing record holder. Draft Projection : Day 3 pick, intriguing skill set. SWAC: Prairie View A&M at Florida A&M Date & Time : Saturday, 4 p.m. ET (ESPN2) Isaiah Major, LB, Florida A&M Strengths : Run defense, gap shooting. 2023 Performance : Leading tackler, 177 tackles and 25 TFLs in two seasons. Draft Projection : Late-round pick or undrafted, special teams potential. Sun Belt: Appalachian State at Troy Date & Time : Saturday, 4 p.m. ET (ESPN) Javon Solomon, EDGE, Troy Strengths : Sack ability, versatile pass-rushing. 2023 Performance : Tied for second in FBS in sacks. Draft Projection : Late-round pick, fits as a 3-4 OLB in the NFL.

Evolving NFL Team Building Strategies Building a successful team in the ever-evolving landscape of the NFL has seen significant shifts, particularly in the approach to the off-season and draft strategies. Traditionally, the backbone of roster construction lay in the gradual accumulation of talent through the NFL Draft, with free agency playing a supporting role. However, recent trends have showcased a change in philosophy, with some franchises adopting a more aggressive stance in both the draft and free agency. Los Angeles Rams: A Case Study in Aggressive Team Building The Los Angeles Rams’ 2021 Super Bowl victory, driven by their bold trade for quarterback Matthew Stafford, exemplifies this new approach, demonstrating that immediate success can be achieved by pushing all chips to the center. Yet, the subsequent season highlighted the risks of such a strategy, as the Rams faced challenges in sustaining their success due to heavy investment in a few key players and depleted draft capital. Blended Approaches: Philadelphia Eagles and Kansas City Chiefs On the other hand, teams like the Philadelphia Eagles and Kansas City Chiefs illustrate a more blended approach. The Eagles, leveraging aggressive moves - like acquiring AJ Brown - and astute draft choices, have managed to strike a balance, propelling them to Super Bowl contention. Similarly, the Chiefs, led by Patrick Mahomes, embody a philosophy of steady, long-term team building through the draft, supplemented by strategic free-agency decisions. This approach, akin to the Patriots' during their dynasty years, suggests a sustainable model for consistent success. The Dynamic NFL Landscape and Future Strategies These varied strategies underscore a more dynamic NFL landscape, where the draft remains a fundamental element but is now part of a broader, more nuanced approach to team building. The key for franchises lies in adapting to this changing environment - balancing the immediacy of free agency acquisitions with the long-term benefits of a well-executed draft strategy - to craft a championship-quality roster. Leveraging Analytical Models and Film Review in the NFL In the intricate and competitive realm of the NFL, the importance of leveraging analytical models and film review for self-scouting and evaluating draft talent is paramount. Every NFL team employs a comprehensive approach, integrating data analysis and detailed film review to understand their team's strengths, weaknesses, and needs. This meticulous process forms the backbone of preparing for the NFL Draft, allowing teams to pinpoint prospects that align with their specific requirements strategically. Team Needs Analysis for the 2024 NFL Draft The Team Needs analysis offered provides an early, insightful overview of potential strategies and considerations for each team ahead of the 2024 NFL Draft. By analyzing positional needs and assessing the current roster, teams can navigate the draft with a clear understanding of which positions require bolstering. This is not just about finding the best talent available; it's about finding the right fit for each team's unique system and future aspirations. Importance of Positional Need Understanding for NFL Teams Additionally, understanding the level of need by position is crucial for NFL General Managers and front-office personnel. This knowledge equips them to prepare for various scenarios, whether trading up for a high-value player or finding hidden gems in later rounds. The positional overview we provide in the below analysis is derived from comprehensive team needs data. This strategic insight is invaluable for making informed decisions that shape the future of NFL franchises. NFL Team Needs Overview The data below is an overview of positional needs for every NFL team. Offensive Linemen (OL): 23% Cornerbacks (CB): 23% Edge Rushers (Edge): 23% Wide Receivers (WR): 14% Defensive Tackles (DT): 14% Quarterbacks (QB): 9% Tight Ends (TE): 9% Other Needs: 8% The current data indicates a substantial demand among NFL teams for bolstering their offensive lines, with 23% of team needs focused on Offensive Linemen (OL). This trend is reflective of the league's emphasis on protecting quarterbacks. Similarly, with the NFL evolving into a predominantly passing league, the same percentage of needs (23%) is directed toward acquiring skilled Cornerbacks (CB) and Edge Rushers (Edge). These positions are critical for enhancing pass defense and applying pressure on opposing quarterbacks. Preliminary Individual NFL Draft Team Needs Analysis Chicago Bears (via CAR) Primary Need: OL Alternate Needs: OT, IOL, WR, TE, Edge Needs Analysis: Focus on interior offensive line and overall depth. Arizona Cardinals Primary Need: CB Alternate Needs: CB, WR, DT, IOL, TE Needs Analysis: Decisions to make regarding tight end and wide receiver positions. New England Patriots Primary Need: QB Alternate Needs: QB, CB, TE, OT, WR Needs Analysis: Require attention to offensive line depth. Chicago Bears Primary Need: OL Alternate Needs: OT, IOL, WR, TE, Edge Needs Analysis: Focus on interior offensive line and overall depth. Washington Commanders Primary Need: EDGE Alternate Needs: Edge, WR, OT, LB, CB Needs Analysis: Necessity for linebacker and depth in various positions. New York Giants Primary Need: OL Alternate Needs: RB, DT, QB, OL, TE Needs Analysis: Emphasis on building around young offensive linemen. Tampa Bay Buccaneers Primary Need: IOL Alternate Needs: QB, IOL, LB, S, CB Needs Analysis: Likely looking for a long-term solution at quarterback. New York Jets Primary Need: OT Alternate Needs: OT, IOL, QB, S, WR Needs Analysis: Consideration for wide receiver and offensive line. Los Angeles Chargers Primary Need: CB Alternate Needs: CB, RB, DT, TE, WR Needs Analysis: Need for depth at receiver and possible changes in the roster. Tennessee Titans Primary Need: OT Alternate Needs: OT, WR, Edge, RB, DT Needs Analysis: Focus on interior defensive line and overall roster depth. Baltimore Ravens Primary Need: IDL Alternate Needs: DT, WR, OG, RB, CB Needs Analysis: Running back as a potential need. Philadelphia Eagles Primary Need: CB Alternate Needs: RB, Edge, WR, LB, CB Needs Analysis: Focus on defensive line. No 1st Round Pick - Carolina Panthers Primary Need: OL Alternate Needs: Edge, WR, CB, LB, IOL Needs Analysis: Focus on offensive improvement and receiving corps. No 1st Round Pick - Cleveland Browns Primary Need: OT Alternate Needs: S, OT, Edge, DT, LB Needs Analysis: Emphasis on defensive backfield and line.

In the high-stakes college football arena, the Michigan vs. Ohio State rivalry boasts rosters teeming with NFL-caliber talent. As we focus on the potential NFL Draft prospects from these prestigious programs, it becomes clear that these two powerhouses could heavily influence the 2024 Draft. With the prospect of as many as 15-20 players from each team being drafted, our analysis centers on key 2024 eligible NFL Draft prospects. Our analysis includes the Football Scout 365 NFL Draft Ceiling Potential grade. The ceiling grade provides our vision of what we think a prospect can develop into at the NFL level. The analysis also incorporates each 2024 NFL Draft prospect's three-year PFF grades. Key 2024 NFL Draft Prospects to Watch Ahead of the Michigan vs. Ohio State Matchup Ohio State Offense Marvin Harrison Jr. - Wide Receiver: A player with an elite ceiling, Marvin Harrison Jr. stands out as a prototypical outside receiver, distinguished by his size, speed, and exceptional ball skills. TreVeyon Henderson - Running Back: Dynamic in both rushing and passing games, TreVeyon Henderson is a two-phase talent, contributing significantly to Ohio State's offensive prowess. Emeka Egbuka - Wide Receiver: Offering versatility and adaptability, Emeka Egbuka is a dynamic and versatile receiver, enhancing Ohio State's offensive strategy. Michigan Offense J.J. McCarthy - Quarterback: With exceptional speed and arm strength, J.J. McCarthy is a highly athletic quarterback, a key player in Michigan's offensive lineup. Blake Corum - Running Back: A versatile running back, Blake Corum adds depth to Michigan's ground game, showcasing skills akin to notable players like Kenneth Walker, JK Dobbins, and Bryce Love. Roman Wilson - Wide Receiver: Known for his vertical threat capability, Roman Wilson is a pivotal part of Michigan's passing offense. Donovan Edwards - Running Back: Complementing Michigan's zone-blocking scheme, Donovan Edwards brings a versatile skill set to the team's rushing attack. Ohio State Defense J.T. Tuimoloau - Defensive End: J.T. Tuimoloau, known for his versatility, physical traits, and pursuit abilities, is a key figure in Ohio State's defensive line. Denzel Burke - Cornerback: As a tall, lanky cornerback with notable speed and physicality, Denzel Burke is a vital part of Ohio State's secondary. Tyleik Williams - Nose Tackle: Effective in a two-gap system, Tyleik Williams's thick build makes him a formidable presence on Ohio State's defensive front. Michigan Defense Mike Sainristil - Cornerback: Versatile in both nickel and press coverage, Mike Sainristil plays a crucial role in Michigan's secondary. Kris Jenkins - Defensive Lineman: A robust and commanding presence on the defensive line, Kris Jenkins excels in run-stopping, bolstering Michigan's defense. Michael Barrett - Linebacker: Known for his versatility and impact at the line of scrimmage, Michael Barrett is a key asset in Michigan's linebacking corps. Ohio State Buckeyes The Ohio State Buckeyes top graded 2024 NFL Draft prospects, according to Football Scout 365. Marvin Harrison Jr. Position: Wide Receiver School: Ohio State Draft Grade: 75.3 Ceiling: Elite Three-Year PFF Grades: 2023 - 89.2, 2022 - 90.2, 2021 - 60.5 Total Snaps in 2023: 591 Play Style/Scheme Fit: Prototypical outside receiver with size, speed, and ball skills. TreVeyon Henderson Position: Running Back School: Ohio State Draft Grade: 66.0 Ceiling: High-End Starter Potential Three-Year PFF Grades: 2023 - 89.3, 2022 - 73.9, 2021 - 81.4 Total Snaps in 2023: 306 Play Style/Scheme Fit: Dynamic two-phase talent, effective in both rushing and passing games. Emeka Egbuka Position: Wide Receiver School: Ohio State Draft Grade: 66.8 Ceiling: High-End Starter Potential Three-Year PFF Grades: 2023 - 73.6, 2022 - 83.1, 2021 - 72.8 Total Snaps in 2023: 345 Play Style/Scheme Fit: Dynamic and versatile receiver. J.T. Tuimoloau Position: Defensive End School: Ohio State Draft Grade: 65.9 Ceiling: High-End Starter Potential Three-Year PFF Grades: 2023 - 73.7, 2022 - 75.1, 2021 - 60.4 Total Snaps in 2023: 561 Play Style/Scheme Fit: Versatile with physical traits and pursuit abilities. Tyleik Williams Position: Nose Tackle School: Ohio State Draft Grade: 63.1 Ceiling: Mid-Level Starter Potential Three-Year PFF Grades: 2023 - 83.1, 2022 - 80.9, 2021 - 75.4 Total Snaps in 2023: 529 Play Style/Scheme Fit: Thickly-built, effective in a two-gap system. Michael Hall Jr. Position: Defensive Lineman School: Ohio State Draft Grade: 61.3 Ceiling: Mid-Level Starter Potential Three-Year PFF Grades: 2023 - 73.8, 2022 - 80.3, 2021 - 60.4 Total Snaps in 2023: 333 Play Style/Scheme Fit: Known for explosiveness and lateral burst. Denzel Burke Position: Cornerback School: Ohio State Draft Grade: 61.6 Ceiling: Mid-Level Starter Potential Three-Year PFF Grades: 2023 - 81.1, 2022 - 67.9, 2021 - 68.8 Total Snaps in 2023: 449 Play Style/Scheme Fit: Tall, lanky cornerback with speed and physicality. Donovan Jackson Position: Interior Lineman School: Ohio State Draft Grade: 62.2 Ceiling: Mid-Level Starter Potential Three-Year PFF Grades: 2023 - 70.0, 2022 - 76.7, 2021 - 68.5 Total Snaps in 2023: 710 Play Style/Scheme Fit: Versatile in both run and pass blocking. Matthew Jones Position: Offensive Guard School: Ohio State Draft Grade: 61.1 Ceiling: Mid-Level Starter Potential Play Style/Scheme Fit: Mauler in run game, patient in pass protection. Jack Sawyer Position: Defensive End School: Ohio State Draft Grade: 57.8 Ceiling: Low-Level Starter Potential Three-Year PFF Grades: 2023 - 88.9, 2022 - 74.0, 2021 - 66.0 Total Snaps in 2023: 492 Play Style/Scheme Fit: High-energy style, suitable for various defensive schemes. Tommy Eichenberg Position: Linebacker School: Ohio State Draft Grade: 56.9 Ceiling: Low-Level Starter Potential Three-Year PFF Grades: 2023 - 63.2, 2022 - 86.8, 2021 - 64.4 Total Snaps in 2023: 547 Play Style/Scheme Fit: Run-defending linebacker with good instincts. Cade Stover Position: Tight End School: Ohio State Draft Grade: 60.5 Ceiling: Mid-Level Starter Potential Three-Year PFF Grades: 2023 - 79.7, 2022 - 69.2, 2021 - 58.2 Total Snaps in 2023: 525 Play Style/Scheme Fit: Inline multi-role tight end, high-effort blocker. Michigan Wolverines The Michigan Wolverines top graded 2024 NFL Draft prospects, according to Football Scout 365. Roman Wilson Position: Wide Receiver School: Michigan Draft Grade: 67.9 Ceiling: High-End Starter Potential Three-Year PFF Grades: 2023 - 86.4, 2022 - 70.5, 2021 - 68.4 Total Snaps in 2023: 371 Play Style/Scheme Fit: Vertical threat capability. J.J. McCarthy Position: Quarterback School: Michigan Draft Grade: 65.6 Ceiling: High-End Starter Potential Three-Year PFF Grades: 2023 - 91.1, 2022 - 77.7, 2021 - 84.0 Total Snaps in 2023: 592 Play Style/Scheme Fit: Highly athletic quarterback with exceptional speed and arm strength. Kris Jenkins Position: Defensive Lineman School: Michigan Draft Grade: 62.9 Ceiling: Mid-Level Starter Potential Three-Year PFF Grades: 2023 - 80.5, 2022 - 80.7, 2021 - 72.4 Total Snaps in 2023: 284 Play Style/Scheme Fit: Robust and commanding presence, thriving in run-stopping. Zak Zinter Position: Offensive Lineman School: Michigan Draft Grade: 64.4 Ceiling: Mid-Level Starter Potential Three-Year PFF Grades: 2023 - 80.0, 2022 - 75.7, 2021 - 66.1 Total Snaps in 2023: 609 Play Style/Scheme Fit: Robust and aggressive style, especially in the run game. Blake Corum Position: Running Back School: Michigan Draft Grade: 64.7 Ceiling: Mid-Level Starter Potential Three-Year PFF Grades: 2023 - 81.5, 2022 - 96.2, 2021 - 89.0 Total Snaps in 2023: 328 Play Style/Scheme Fit: Versatile running back, similar to Kenneth Walker, JK Dobbins, and Bryce Love. Donovan Edwards Position: Running Back School: Michigan Draft Grade: 63.7 Ceiling: Mid-Level Starter Potential Three-Year PFF Grades: 2023 - 67.5, 2022 - 86.9, 2021 - 74.1 Total Snaps in 2023: 284 Play Style/Scheme Fit: Versatile skill set, complements a zone-blocking scheme. Mike Sainristil Position: Cornerback School: Michigan Draft Grade: 63.4 Ceiling: Mid-Level Starter Potential Three-Year PFF Grades: 2023 - 75.8, 2022 - 83.3, 2021 - 60.0 Total Snaps in 2023: 440 Play Style/Scheme Fit: Versatile, adept in nickel and press coverage. Rod Moore Position: Defensive Back School: Michigan Draft Grade: 63.4 Ceiling: Mid-Level Starter Potential Three-Year PFF Grades: 2023 - 67.6, 2022 - 83.8, 2021 - 69.0 Total Snaps in 2023: 280 Play Style/Scheme Fit: Best characterized by his propensity for diagnosing plays. Junior Colson Position: Linebacker School: Michigan Draft Grade: 63.1 Ceiling: Mid-Level Starter Potential Three-Year PFF Grades: 2023 - 78.9, 2022 - 75.5, 2021 - 48.5 Total Snaps in 2023: 452 Play Style/Scheme Fit: Versatile linebacker who thrives in both run defense and pass coverage. Michael Barrett Position: Linebacker School: Michigan Draft Grade: 63.3 Ceiling: Mid-Level Starter Potential Three-Year PFF Grades: Information not provided Total Snaps in 2023: Information not provided Play Style/Scheme Fit: Noted for his versatility, capable of impacting the line of scrimmage off the edge. Cornelius Johnson Position: Wide Receiver School: Michigan Draft Grade: 62.1 Ceiling: Mid-Level Starter Potential Three-Year PFF Grades: 2023 - 86.4, 2022 - 70.5, 2021 - 68.4 Total Snaps in 2023: 371 Play Style/Scheme Fit: His height and ability to track the ball make him a formidable threat in the deep passing game.

Daniel A. Crane's Analysis of NCAA Bylaw 11.6.1 and Its Antitrust Implications: In his Yale Journal on Regulation article "More on Sign Stealing and Antitrust," dated November 14, 2023, Daniel A. Crane examines the antitrust implications of NCAA Bylaw 11.6.1 in light of Michigan Football's sign-stealing allegations. Crane argues that while the rule is not inherently illegal under antitrust laws, its enforcement could face legal scrutiny. He asserts the rule, viewed more as financial than game-related, might restrain competition, leading to antitrust risks. Click To Read About: Michigan Football Sign Stealing - Potential Loophole In NCAA Bylaws? Key Points from Crane's Article: Rule of Reason: Bylaw 11.6.1 is subject to antitrust's rule of reason, adding complexity and unpredictability to its enforcement. Financial Focus: The rule, while not directly mentioning money, impacts financial aspects like scouting. Competition Restraint: Agreements to stop scouting could be illegal under antitrust laws, but Bylaw 11.6.1 avoids this due to its integration into NCAA regulations. Effects Argument: The rule's adherence or violation might affect on-field performance, but its financial motivation remains unchanged. Salary Cap Analogy: Similar to professional sports salary caps, a total ban on scouts is akin to a $0 salary cap and could be anticompetitive. Legal Risks: Enforcing the rule carries antitrust risk; a well-crafted legal complaint could lead to significant proceedings under the Sherman Act. Relevance to Michigan Football's Sign-Stealing Allegations: Crane's analysis indicates that enforcing Bylaw 11.6.1 in cases like Michigan's sign-stealing allegations might encounter antitrust law challenges, raising questions about the rule's legitimacy and NCAA's enforcement approach. In-Depth Breakdown of The Daniel Crane Article On Sign Stealing and Antitrust Daniel A. Crane's article in the Yale Journal on Regulation discusses the antitrust implications of enforcing NCAA Bylaw 11.6.1 in the context of sign-stealing allegations, like those associated with Michigan Football. Crane points out that while some business practices are outright illegal under antitrust laws, a rule prohibiting scouting would be judged under antitrust's rule of reason, which is more nuanced and unpredictable​​. He elaborates that the no-scouting rule is seen more as a financial rule than a game rule. The rule doesn’t directly mention money but aims to prohibit conduct (scouting) that inherently involves financial considerations. For instance, an agreement between schools to discontinue scouting would typically be illegal under antitrust laws as it restrains competition. However, Bylaw 11.6.1 escapes per se illegality because it's part of NCAA’s regulation of college athletics, though it still carries antitrust risks​​. Crane also touches on the effects argument, where adherence or violation of the rule by schools could impact on-field performance. He argues that this doesn’t change the underlying financial motivation of such rules, likening it to rules on player compensation or NIL (Name, Image, Likeness), which were struck down in previous cases​​. He further illustrates his point using the example of salary caps in professional sports, which are legal only due to a statutory labor exemption for collective bargaining. Absent this exemption, such salary caps would violate antitrust laws. This analogy is used to show how a total prohibition on scouts, as in Bylaw 11.6.1, could be seen as a $0 salary cap and thus anti-competitive​​. In conclusion, Crane emphasizes that while there are arguments that the no-scouting rule doesn't violate antitrust laws, enforcing Bylaw 11.6.1 still creates antitrust risk. He suggests that a well-crafted complaint against this rule under the Sherman Act could likely survive a motion to dismiss, leading to discovery and potential legal complications​​. In the context of Michigan Football's sign-stealing allegations, this analysis suggests that the enforcement of Bylaw 11.6.1 could potentially face legal challenges under antitrust law, raising questions about the rule's validity and the NCAA's enforcement actions.

Reviewing The Top 2023 NFL QB Draft Picks: NFL Draft Rookie Review Will Levis Below is a structured overview of former Kentucky QB and current Tennessee Titan QB Will Levis, including his pre-draft scouting report and player comparisons. 2023 Pre-NFL Draft Profile: Position: Quarterback College: Kentucky Height: 6'3 and 7/8" (6037 in scouting notation) Weight: 229 pounds Drafted: Specific draft position not provided in the initial information NFL Career Start: Made a notable debut with four touchdowns in his first game. Demonstrated significant resilience and play-making ability under pressure. Mike Vrabel, Titans coach, has given measured and constructive public assessments of his performance. Scouting Report: Will Levis is compared physically to Josh Allen with a strong arm, suggesting the ability to make powerful throws. As an athlete, he can extend plays and is capable of running with the ball to keep drives alive. Began the 2022 season with a developmental grade, but with the potential for an immediate impact. Primary Scout: Brandon Lundberg Playstyle & Scheme Fit: Levis is adaptable to various offensive schemes, but an offensive system that employs play-action, bootlegs, and read-option would likely best leverage his strengths. Key Strengths: Impressive arm strength. Good mobility. Solid mechanics. Key Weaknesses: Requires improvement in field awareness. Needs to develop better anticipation for plays. Ball placement has room for improvement. Player Comparisons: Josh Allen Ben Roethlisberger Carson Wentz Assessment of Will Levis Based on Early NFL Performance and Scouting Report: Will Levis’ early performances in the NFL have shown flashes of the potential identified in his scouting report. His strong arm is evident from his multi-touchdown debut, and his athleticism has been showcased as he maneuvered within the pocket and extended plays. Arm Strength : The four-touchdown debut underlines his strong arm, enabling him to make impactful plays downfield. Mobility : Despite facing defensive pressure, Levis has used his mobility to evade defenders and extend plays, aligning with his scouting report. Mechanics : His ability to connect on various throws suggests that Levis has brought solid mechanics from college to the NFL. Awareness and Anticipation : Coach Vrabel’s comments indicate that while there are positive signs, Levis has areas to grow regarding game awareness. Ball Placement : There may be inconsistencies as indicated by the Titans' struggles in the red zone, pointing towards Levis's need to refine his ball placement. Playstyle & Scheme Fit : The Titans' offensive strategies seem to accommodate Levis’ strengths, utilizing him in ways that align with the scouting report's recommendations. Developmental Grade and Ceiling Potential : Levis’ performances suggest that he is on track with the projected developmental grade, displaying an "Instant Impact ceiling" potential, as noted by scouts. In conclusion, Will Levis' initial NFL outings reflect the strengths and areas for development that scouts noted. His physical attributes, like arm strength and mobility, have been apparent, while his mechanics have been reliable. As he continues to gain experience and refine his awareness, anticipation, and ball placement, Levis is positioned to grow into the high-ceiling quarterback that his pre-draft assessment predicted. Let us know what you think about our Will Levis rookie review.

Via a Tweet (X) this morning from Dan Wetzel (Yahoo Sports), here is the University of Michigan’s 10-page letter to the Big Ten responding to the sportsmanship investigation. In addition, I summarized the 10-page document below. University of Michigan's Formal Response: The University of Michigan has submitted a tenacious and detailed formal response to a Big Ten investigation notice regarding sportsmanship policy violations. Michigan asserts that any disciplinary action at this stage would be procedurally incorrect and unjustified as the NCAA investigation is still active, and the university has not had the chance to review evidence or respond appropriately. The response emphasizes the limitations NCAA rules impose on Michigan conducting its own probe and asserts the right to further statements as the investigation proceeds. Contention Against Disciplinary Actions: Michigan contends that disciplinary actions based on unproven rule violations would violate the Big Ten Conference Handbook and that any punitive measures against Coach Jim Harbaugh would overstep the Commissioner's authority and lack factual basis. The university also challenges the evidence quality cited in the conference's communication, labeling it as predominantly second or third-hand summaries rather than the tangible evidence required by the Handbook. Advisement on Precedent-Setting: The response also suggests a cautious approach from the Conference in setting precedents, given the potentially widespread nature of in-person scouting and other dubious practices in the league. It points out that if the activities of Connor Stalions are deemed violations, similar actions by other teams may also be rule breaches, as evidenced by decoded signals from a Purdue coach. Commitment to Rules Compliance: Finally, Michigan reiterates its commitment to compliance, stating its readiness to assume responsibility for any confirmed misconduct following the NCAA investigation. However, it maintains that fairness and adherence to the Conference Handbook necessitate a thorough and equitable process for adjudicating violations, mitigating actions, and determining appropriate sanctions. Any disciplinary action without such due process is deemed improper and premature by the university.