Return to 2010 NFL Draft: Scouting Reports
1. Jimmy Clausen, Notre Dame (6-3/225)
Charlie Weis’ golden boy is the top quarterback in the 2010 NFL Draft, and for good reason. Clausen’s total-field accuracy is unmatched at the college level. His arm strength is above-average, but not elite. He is not very quick or fast, but his mobility is still decent due to his great pocket awareness and vision. His quick release also helps cut down the chance of a sack. Clausen’s intangibles are off the charts.
Pros: Accuracy, Arm Strength, Decision-Making, Awareness
Verdict: Top 10
2. Sam Bradford, Oklahoma (6-4/220)
This Sooner signal-caller has taken a beating this last year, both in his 2010 NFL Draft stock, and on his shoulder. When healthy, Bradford has great accuracy on throws under 15 yards, and pretty decent accuracy on long throws. His arm-strength is good enough to play in the NFL, and his decision-making and vision are at the elite level. Bradford’s main weakness is the fact that he has exclusively played out of the shotgun.
Pros: Size, Accuracy, Decision-Making, Awareness
Cons: Injury Concerns, System Experience
Verdict: 1st Round
3. Colt McCoy, Texas
Colt McCoy is one of the best college QB’s of all time. However, not all of his skills will translate to the NFL. At Texas, their system accentuates his accuracy by having most receivers sit down in zones, as opposed to being on the run. McCoy also tends to lock onto one side of the field. The fact that McCoy doesn’t play under center will also be seen as a negative. That said, his speed and quickness tend to make up for a lot of his deficiencies at the NCAA level.
Pros: Accuracy, Mobility, Intangibles
Cons: Field Vision, System Experience
Verdict: 2nd Round
4. Dan Lefevour, Central Michigan (6-3/225)
A Chippewa legend, Lefevour is a very athletic QB that can make plays at the drop of a hat. Some have compared him to Tony Romo, although his arm strength isn’t quite at that level.
Pros: Athleticism, Field Vision, Pocket Awareness, Mobility
Cons: Arm Strength, Slow Delivery
Verdict: 2nd-3rd Round
5. Tony Pike, Cincinnati (6-6/230)
Pike is an intriguing prospect, as he will be a 24 year old rookie next year. He seems to be a good fit for a west-coast system that emphasizes quick, accurate throws with impeccable timing. Pike is somewhat of a statue in the pocket, and his arm strength could be compared to Chad Pennington. Like Pennington when he was drafted, his positives outweigh his negatives at this point.
Pros: Accuracy, Timing, Size
Cons: Arm Strength, Mobility
Verdict: 2nd-3rd Round
6. Tim Tebow, Florida (6-3/245)
If you haven’t seen Tim Tebow play, Tim McCarver is very angry with you. Tebow showed in the Sugar Bowl that he can make NFL throws, but his passes lack the zip that NFL-sized windows require. His lack of NFL-Playbook experience is also a hindrance. Tebow’s desire and leadership will make him an attractive selection to a team on the second day, although he may never play a snap at QB.
Pros: Size, Intangibles, Mobility, Versatility
Cons: System Experience, Accuracy
Verdict: 2nd-4th Round
7. Sean Canfield, Oregon State (6-4/215)
Canfield is a tough kid that maximizes his talent. He shows good touch on short routes, but after about 15 yards his throws start to get fluttery. Should be a good backup that could develop into a starter someday.
Pros: Toughness, Pocket Awareness, Field Vision
Cons: Mobility, Arm Strength, Decision-Making
Verdict: 3rd-4th Round