Category Archives: Scouts

NFL Scouting: What Are the Negatives?

13 Friday Nov 2026

Posted by in Getting started, NFL draft, Scouts

≈ Leave a comment

I think of myself as an advocate for NFL scouts, and I’m proud to be. One of the reasons for that is my respect for them, because it’s far from the sexy occupation some perceive it to be. In fact, there are some really negative things that are the reality of working as a professional evaluator. Here are a few.

Pay: If there’s one thing that scouts continually discuss among themselves, it’s the relatively low level of compensation. While head coach salaries have helped carry assistant coach pay into the stratosphere, the same has not happened with GM contracts. I think things are inching up, and entry-level pay is in the $50K to $80K range (some are higher), but you’re not getting rich as an NFL scout. If you can hang around for 10 years or so and get to National Scout, you can get paid in the $300,000 to $450,000 range, which is probably what the tight ends coach makes on the team. I know what you’re thinking: I’d love to get paid $100,000 or more to scout players, but for reasons we’re about to explain, the money should probably be a little better.

Workload: It’s hard to explain what it’s like to be a road scout today. Yes, you get to go school to school, meeting football people and talking about the game non-stop. There’s a lot of camaraderie. Still, it’s a positively grueling job, with some teams sending scouts out for literally two weeks at a time. Also, some teams require you to file reports by certain deadlines, which is actually smart, because if you let your work pile up, you might never recover. You hear stories about guys having to wash their underwear in a hotel sink, searching for someone in a small town to provide quarters for the laundromat, all kinds of stuff. Meanwhile, especially if you’re on the West Coast, you might have to drive a long ways overnight, then be at a school at the crack of dawn. It’s a real grind.

Volatility: It’s almost like working in the mob — you think everything is good, you’re safe in your job, and then the GM calls you in and lets you go. Sometimes it’s a bit more predictable (new GMs tend to bring in their own guys), but sometimes, scouts just get blindsided. When almost everyone in the business works on a two-year deal with no rollover, it’s really easy to eat a contract. The encroachment of analytics staffs (while scouting budgets stay flat) means even more pressure. Then there’s seemingly a new company offering software that allows teams to evaluate players using AI every day.

No runway: Being a scout doesn’t really prepare you for anything. Though some are able to transition into coaching, it’s not a smooth or direct path. Maybe you can latch on with another team if you’re let go, but a lot of scouts feel that building relationships that lead to new jobs is mildly disloyal. And if you get let go after 15-20 years, you’re middle-aged and needing to start a new career. It’s one reason you see a lot of former scouts becoming realtors or truck drivers. But there’s more. NFL teams — despite making billions of dollars — have been systematically ending their pension programs for scouts. Last I heard, only 10 teams still offer one. So when you’re done, you’re done.

Six Points: A Few NFL Scouting Trends I’ve Noticed

06 Friday Nov 2026

Posted by in NFL draft, Scouts

≈ Leave a comment

This week, I updated our Scouts by Area Grid, the team-by-team scouting assignments for the evaluators on all 32 teams. I got to it a little later than normal this year, but I put a lot of work into it, contacting all the teams to make sure I got the most accurate information possible. Along the way, I learned a few things. Here are a few insights about how teams are building their staffs right now.

  • Several teams (11, to be exact) have carved out a new area called ‘mid-Atlantic.’ It’s basically the area from the Carolinas west as far as far as Kansas and Oklahoma. OK, maybe it’s not a new area, but it seems to be gaining in popularity, and I can see why. It includes some of the smaller P4 schools, but also some of the heavy-duty G6s like Tulsa and Memphis and several decent MAC schools.
  • At the same time, we’re seeing fewer and fewer teams that have scouts in all five major regions (Southwest, Southeast, Midwest, Northeast and West Coast). Four teams don’t have Southwest scouts. Four don’t have Midwest scouts. Three don’t have West Coast scouts, which really doesn’t add up given all the space that has to be covered on the Pacific side of the country. There’s probably never been a better time to be a scouting assistant than now. Seems like they’re making school visits almost immediately.
  • Speaking of the West Coast and the responsibilities that come with covering it, there are two former high-level executives, Eric Stokes (Seahawks) and JoJo Wooden (Ravens), who are covering that area. I don’t expect either to be there for long, but it’s an indication of how much teams value mature evaluators in that region.
  • I don’t have totals, but looking at the scouts patrolling the Southeast these days, it’s amazing how many are in their first few years of scouting. We’re seeing far fewer established scouts running the roads in Florida, Mississippi, Alabama, the Carolinas and so forth. My guess is that because teams have grown so much at the executive level, a lot of those upper-level evaluators are hitting the Southeast pretty hard. They need fewer real decision-makers in that area.
  • At the same time, I think scouts in the Midwest are incrementally more senior than their Southeast counterparts. Is it because the Big Ten is overtaking the SEC in talent? Or because executives need someone they can trust evaluating Nebraska, Michigan and Ohio State while they focus on Alabama and Ole Miss?
  • I think more teams are promoting Area Scouts to National (or, sometimes, Senior) Scout titles, but not giving them over-the-top responsibilities. Instead, they’re handing them a more senior title but, I suspect, not giving them a lot of compensation to go with it (or any real change to their duties). This is just a theory, but as teams look for ways to pay their growing analytics staffs, something has to give. Hopefully we’ll learn more about that when we conduct our salary surveys in January.

What Do P4 Front Offices Look Like? Setting the Table

30 Friday Oct 2026

Posted by in College personnel, NIL, Scouts, Transfer portal

≈ Leave a comment

Today in the Friday Wrap (register here), we conduct a long-awaited deep dive into Power 4 front offices. It’s something I’ve wondered about for a long time, and it mirrors our actual breakdown of NFL front offices, which will come later this fall (here’s last year’s if you’re interested in geeking out).

Anywhere, here’s our big board if you want to see what we found out (sorry, pay link). Before you dig into tonight’s Wrap (which comes out at 7:30 p.m. EDT), in which we make our observations and insights about the current state of football front offices, I wanted to set the table a little.

  • Lots of teams have scouting analysts and scouting assistants that they list on the team’s website. However, we didn’t count those positions as true executive-level positions. We only counted GMs/AGMs, directors and coordinators.
  • Though we didn’t actually count the number of chiefs of staff, that position seems to be far more necessary than GM these days. Obviously, some of those chiefs of staff are doing some amount of evaluation and scouting, though it’s nearly impossible to guess which do and how much.
  • Though it seems like every program has a general manager these days, at least at the P4 level, that’s not true. Not even close. We only counted 59, and that’s with eight school officials that seemed to act as GMs even if they didn’t hold the actual title. Where we had to guess, we did it based on our conversations with NIL agents and other college staffers during our ratings posts in the Wrap and on ITL.
  • When it comes to scouting, some schools cleave up their departments based on offensive and defensive evaluation. Others do it based on the portal vs. high school personnel. I don’t know which way is right, and if there’s a majority on how most do it, I didn’t see it.
  • Analytics is a hot topic, especially on the NFL side, but on the college side, it’s still not a primary focus. There are a handful of schools that have analytics staffers, but for the most part, that seems to be farmed out to the various software services that are such a big part of how colleges work.
  • Incidentally, a conversation I had with a P4 GM last week led me to believe that more and more teams (about 12, by my count) are looking to build their own proprietary tech structures that give them even better access to the information they have, which might mean they start to move away from subscription services. But that’s a conversation for another day.
  • Even fewer schools have staffers assigned to artificial intelligence, though I expect that to change. USC, of course, is the exception, though there are probably a half-dozen schools with a football technology staff member, and those jobs could have an AI component.

Anyway, if the changing face of college front offices interests you, and it probably should if you work in the football space, make sure to check out the Wrap later today and today’s post at the mother ship. It’s a fascinating and quickly-changing part of the college football universe.

Taking a Look at the Modern NFL Director of College Scouting

25 Friday Sep 2026

Posted by in Scouts

≈ Leave a comment

Earning the title of Director of College Scouting for an NFL team is undeniable proof that you’ve “arrived” as a member of pro football’s intelligence community. But what else does it mean? Does it have the resonance that it once had?

We looked at all 27 today at Inside the League (the Bears, Bengals, Cardinals, Chargers, Rams and Saints don’t have one, while the Chiefs have two) and it was interesting to see the sweep of backgrounds, ages and terms of service. Here are a few observations.

  • In previous eras when becoming a GM was a more ordered process, it was probably more commonplace that being a college director was a prerequisite to running the front office, but that’s not true anymore. Would you believe that 22 of the 32 NFL GMs were never Directors of College Scouting? That really surprised me, but it’s a reminder that a growing number of GMs have pro scouting backgrounds (like Minnesota’s Nolan Teasley), come from more of a business side (Buffalo’s Brandon Beane and Pittsburgh’s Omar Khan), or just hopped the line altogether (San Francisco’s John Lynch, for example).
  • It’s become an amazingly volatile job, or maybe “transient” would be the right word. Would you believe that the longest-tenured college director is Minnesota’s Mike Sholiton, who’s been on the job since 2021? Eight of the 27 are in their first year in the role. For a job that includes coordinating and sorting out the information coming in from all over the country, that’s a pretty steep learning curve when you’re not gonna be in the job more than 3-4 years.
  • No “big school” experience is necessary in your background. Matter of fact, it might be a disadvantage to have come from a football power, looking at the current lineup. The only current college directors who got their respective undergrad degrees at P4 schools are Dallas’ Mitch LaPoint (Kansas), Carolina’s Jared Kirksey (UCF), Houston’s Mozique McCurtis (USC), San Francisco’s Dom DeCicco (Pitt), Denver’s Bryan Chesin (Arizona), Tampa Bay’s Tony Hardie (Notre Dame), New England’s Tony Kinkela (Washington State), Washington’s Ryan Kessenich (Wisconsin), Atlanta’s Shawn Heinlen (Florida) and the Giants’ Jon Ritcher (NC State).
  • In fact, if you aspire to being a college director, you might want to transfer to a MAC school. Buffalo (Kansas City’s David Hinson, UMass (KC’s Pat Sperduto), Miami (Ohio) Pittsburgh’s Dan Colbert), Ball State (Seattle’s Jason Barnes) and Ohio (Tennessee’s Mike Boni) are all represented.
  • As with most jobs in scouting today, more college directors have been “imported” than have those who rose through the ranks. Only nine of 27 have only worked for the team that employs them now.
  • There’s a pretty vast age range, from 30 to 59. More (12) are in their 40s than any other age. Also, there are more in their 30s (eight) than in their 50s (seven).
  • Though you don’t have to be any certain age to do the job, you do have to be seasoned. Of the 27 college directors, 17 have been working in the league at least since the 2009 season. You’re looking at almost two decades of service before you’re considered for the job. That makes sense.

For someone like me, it’s a little sobering that so many dues-paying executives — like the people who make up the college director community — aren’t seeing a direct path to the GM seat, but I suppose that’s just part of the times we live in. The profile now, mostly, is a scout in his 40s who’s got 15-17 years working in the league and, more often than not, arrived with the current GM.

I hoped — I wished — the results were more of an affirmation of the value of experience in NFL front offices, especially as it relates to who gets the GM jobs. Unfortunately, I just don’t see that in the numbers.

Ben Standig’s Survey on NFL Front Offices: A Few Thoughts

18 Friday Sep 2026

Posted by in Agents, Media, NFL draft, Scouts

≈ Leave a comment

This week, the Scouting the League Podcast guest is Ben Standig, who has his own Substack covering the Commanders (Last Man Standig, which is an awesome title). We spent most of our time on his recently posted 2026 Agent Survey, and as often happens, when we were done, there was a lot more I wanted to cover. Here are a few thoughts on his recent post.

  • One of the questions Ben asks is, who is the league’s best talent evaluator? Because he only polls a select number of NFL agents, no one gets a groundswell of support. Seahawks GM John Schneider (four votes) and Rams GM Les Snead (two votes) lead the way, but 18 others get votes. Both have the respect of their peers (as well as a Best Draft Award for each), so no arguments there. However, I found the remaining 18 interesting. Of the 18, nine are GMs or de facto GMs (Dallas’ Will McClay and New England’s Eliot Wolf), plus one other former GM. However, there are also a few up-and-comers that caught my eye.
  • His question, ‘who is a future GM to watch?,’ yielded six executives who got two votes each. Again, there were a whole lot more (11) who got at least one mention. For what it’s worth, two of those who got two votes are former BART List winners (James Liipfert of the Texans and Terrance Gray of the Bills). It’s no surprise that of the 11, nine are from perennial playoff teams, and two (Jeff King of the Bears and Lance Newmark of the Commanders) are with teams who made the postseason at least once in the last two years. You can be the best in the biz, but if your team doesn’t win, don’t expect other teams to come looking to hire you.
  • Schneider and Philadelphia’s Howie Roseman tied for top GM (seven votes each). Once again, no surprises on either one, though I get the sense from the comments that Schneider would be a lot more popular at happy hour than Roseman. If there’s a surprise, among the ones with multiple votes (there were only four), Denver’s George Paton finished fourth. There was a lot of speculation that he might get moved out when Sean Payton got to town, but I am glad he is getting his due among people who know. He’s another one whose team has won a Best Draft Award, and like Schneider, he gets high marks for likability, as well. Obviously, you don’t have to be likable to win, but it’s also not prohibitive if you are.

If you love the “inside” of the game and track what’s going on in NFL front offices, I highly recommend Ben’s recent piece. It really gives you a sense of what’s going on in the buildings. and I’m always up for hearing informed opinions.

Here’s Why You Can’t Always Trust What ‘Scouts Say’

11 Friday Sep 2026

Posted by in Agents, NFL draft, Scouts

≈ Leave a comment

We’re getting geared up for our Agent Basics Zoom series later this month, so it’s got me thinking about what brand new contract advisors need to know. The feedback I keep getting from them is that they’re worried about not having scouting contacts, and I get that. Still, it’s important to keep scouting feedback in perspective.

In fact, when you hear the media or someone else tell you what “scouts say,” there are a few things to remember:

Is it even a scout?: The title of “scout” is thrown around a lot these days. In my estimation, unless you have real skin in the game (in the form of a place on an NFL staff), you’re not a “scout.” Lots of times, when you read a media report that refers to what “scouts are saying,” there’s a good chance that they’re really referring to what they see online, often from some draftnik or other self-appointed expert. Those aren’t scouts.

Time of year matters: If you had asked scouts in September 2021 if Oklahoma QB Spencer Rattler would be the No. 1 pick in the spring of 2022 if he chose to leave early, most would say yes. By the end of that season, Rattler was no longer even the Sooners starter. This is just one example. The fact is, a player’s draft status depends on a lot of things, not the least of which is his performance on the field. The guy that looks good in Week 3 may look very different by bowl time.

Level of scout matters (as well as area): If you’re a newly minted Area Scout, roaming the Northeast for an NFL team, your opinion matters and the team is counting on you. At the same time, you’re still figuring things out in an area that’s far less dense in NFL prospects than the Southeast or Midwest are. The point is, just because a scout says something doesn’t mean he’s right.

Scouts are not perfect: Let me give you an illustration. I ran the 2008 Hula Bowl. Among the running backs I invited were Lance Ball (Maryland), Marcus Thomas (UTEP), Jalen Parmele (Toledo) and Danny Woodhead (Chadron State). I took the first three because they were direct recommendations of my scouting contacts, and indeed, Thomas and Parmele were among our draft picks. However, the only reason I took Woodhead — the only reason — is because New Balance was trying to work its way into college football, and it sponsored Chadron State. The game’s owner invited Woodhead (going over my head to do it) because it would lock in New Balance as a merchandise/apparel sponsor. Everyone got new shoes because we brought in Woodhead, but I seethed. Well, guess which running back had the most successful career? By the way, he’s not the only one I dismissed as a pro prospect that year. For the story on another couple of my running back mistakes — I promise you I ran everyone by scouts first — check out this post from September 2014.

Look, you won’t find anyone who has more respect for NFL scouts than I do. My whole business model is practically based on it. Still, it’s important to keep things in perspective.

Tips for Agents Seeking Sleepers in the 2027 Draft Class

20 Thursday Aug 2026

Posted by in Agents, Getting started, NFL draft, Scouts

≈ Leave a comment

We’re still 10 days away from the deadline for roster cuts, so NFL teams are still swollen with players they won’t carry into the regular season. Still, I think it’s interesting to dive into the players who make up 90-man rosters to see where they came from and what NFL teams look for these days.

Here are a few fun facts about players making up the 32 90-man rosters as of now.

  • Which states have the best high school football? I think it’s pretty generally accepted that the three top states are Texas, Florida and California. What’s interesting to me is, for the 2026 draft class, Texas (75 players on NFL rosters) is head and shoulders above the other two (Florida 50, California 48). Incidentally, the next three are Georgia (46), Illinois (30) and Maryland (25).
  • With respect to all players (veterans and rookies), Texas still reigns supreme with 335 players. After that it’s Florida (276) and California (247), followed by Georgia (214), North Carolina (110) and Illinois (108). Two things are interesting — the dramatic drop-off from Georgia to North Carolina, and the fact that neither Alabama (86) or Mississippi (59) are higher on the list.
  • The growth at cornerback and wide receiver intrigues me. More and more, NFL teams expect corners to be at least six-feet tall. At present, 198 of the 327 cornerbacks on NFL rosters are 6-0 or taller (yes, I’m aware that listed heights aren’t always precise, but it’s all we have). That’s 60.5 percent. Of those that are shorter than six feet, almost half (62 of 129) are 5-11. However, among corners in the 2026 draft, the number of corners at least 6-0 is only 63.2 percent (43 of 68). I’m sure teams would love to get even taller at that position, but there are just so many players that size who can sprint, twist and move with today’s slot receivers and outside burners. That’s why big corners are doubly valuable.
  • It’s interesting that the cornerback height average (60.5 percent are 6-0 or higher) is pretty much right in line with wide receivers in the league. Of the 387 receivers now on rosters, 262 (67.7 percent) are 6-0 or taller. That holds up for the 2026 draft class, as well, as 66 percent (70 of 106) of receivers in camps are 6-0-plus.
  • It’s probably not a surprise that 90.6 percent of the league is made up of players from FBS schools. However, not all sub-FBS schools are the same. When it comes to FCS schools, there’s only one that registers on the NFL radar, and that’s North Dakota State, which has 16 alumni in NFL camps this summer. What’s interesting is that when it comes to schools a rung below FBS, pretty much all the top teams are in the Pacific Northwest. After NDSU, South Dakota St. is second with 9; South Dakota, Montana and Weber St. (not necessarily Pacific Northwest, but close) among teams tied for third with 5; and Eastern Washington and Montana State among eight teams tied for fourth with 4. Granted, many of these players won’t make NFL rosters, and even more, many of them got to the league before the era of the transfer portal. It’s worth noting that those schools still seem to be attracting NFL eyes.

So, if you’re agent — especially a younger one — trying to find a client who can beat the odds:

  • Recruit players who prepped in Texas, California or Florida (no matter where they went to college)
  • Don’t recruit wide receivers and corners unless they are at least 6-0
  • Look to the Pacific Northwest for hidden gems at small schools.

What Does the 2025 Freaks List Say About Draft Trends?

14 Friday Aug 2026

Posted by in NFL draft, Scouts

≈ Leave a comment

I had lunch with a friend who’s a National Scout swinging through Houston this week and the topic of traits came up. Are teams drafting on tools more than film these days, I asked? He agreed that it definitely seems that way, and also contended that “traits-only” players that might have been seventh-round fliers now seem to go in the fourth and fifth round.

There are others who agree (like this person, whose opinion is relevant — check out the 22:50 mark), but proving that is hard. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder when it comes to the NFL Draft.

Still, with the 2026 Freaks List published this week, it gave me an idea. How many of the 101 players considered most gifted athletically last year in college football do in the 2026 draft? Again, this is far from a perfect gauge of draft trends, but it’s still worth looking at. So I dove in, and here’s what I found.

  • First off, 46 of the 101 were not draft-eligible and are still playing, so the pool is only 55 players.
  • Of the 55, 10 (or 18 percent) not only went undrafted, but they even went unsigned. In other words, they didn’t get anywhere near an NFL camp, even on a tryout basis. This group includes some real college achievers like Cincinnati’s Dontay Corleone and Texas Tech’s Davion Carter. So, once again, simply being gifted athletically is no guarantee of anything.
  • Thirty of the 55 got drafted. Seven were first round, 16 were Day 1 or Day 2 (so less than a third).
  • Ten were signed as UDFAs.
  • Another six got tryouts only (none of the six converted to UDFAs).
  • Bottom line, 40 of the 55 got contracts (drafted or UDFA) and 46 made it at least as far as an NFL camp.

If I’m being honest, this doesn’t really support my theory. In fact, it may be more of an endorsement of the “film is still king” belief.

I look forward to repeating this exercise next year. This year’s list has several repeat performers, such as South Carolina’s Nyck Harbor, Ohio State’s Jeremiah Smith, Oregon’s A’Mauri Washington (the top three on this year’s list) plus many more. Maybe half are back from last year. We’ll see how the players on this year’s list correlate to next year’s draft in a year.

Here’s Your Summer Guide for Getting Ahead in Football

17 Wednesday Jun 2026

Posted by in College personnel, Getting started, NFL draft, NIL, Scouts

≈ Leave a comment

If you’re truly interested in finding a job in football, and you haven’t yet, you can’t use the summer to lay on the beach. June, July and August have become primetime for meetups and conferences that give you a chance to find opportunities. The key is finding the ones that are well-attended and reasonably priced.

Here are three I’ll be attending this summer. I’ve only been to one of them previously, but I’m pretty confident all three are going to be outstanding events.

ADs for Christ Summer Gathering (Birmingham) — Next weekend — Obviously, this one comes with a faith component, so if you’re not a committed Christian, it’s probably not the place for you. On the other hand, as long as you keep the main thing the main thing, it’s a golden opportunity. The speaker lineup includes SEC Commissioner Greg Sankey, Missouri AD Laird Veatch, Ole Miss Senior Deputy AD Eric Wood and more. Jessica Lopez, a key member of the Miami (Fla.) personnel office, runs this, and she’s incredibly organized — she just thinks of everything. This will be my first time attending, but it’s been going on for 10 years. Can’t wait to be there. And cost is just $100. That’s amazing. But again, this is for people who take their faith seriously.

OL Masterminds Summit (Dallas) — July 10-11 — This one is probably more by invitation only, but if you are around offensive linemen much at all, you know who Duke Manyweather is. His annual summit is a big deal, and draws some of the most established names in the game when it comes to centers, guards and tackles (and the people who work with them). Duke has dedicated himself to offensive linemen, whether they’re prospective draft picks or veterans, and has built an incredible reputation for making them better.

Personnel & Recruiting Symposium (Nashville) — Aug. 3-5 — This one is a little pricey but still may sell out. Last year, I think they almost ran out of room at the Renaissance Nashville and I kinda expected them to move it this year. Anyway, it’s really well-run and just overrun with college personnel staffers, NIL and NFL agents, NFL scouts and executives and others associated with the game. The class sessions are great but making and renewing acquaintances is the main reason to be there, especially if you’re still on the new side and trying to build a network.

Which Teams Value RAS the Most?

11 Thursday Jun 2026

Posted by in NFL draft, Scouts

≈ Leave a comment

On our podcast, Rodrik David and I sometimes debate the value of traits when it comes to making draft picks. I think it’s fair to say Rodrik is a big believer in traits, while I wonder if they’re being increasingly overvalued these days. It seems to me that, as I study the draft, teams are looking more than ever at triangle numbers (and other analytics) over film. In some cases, I think traits might far exceed film. But is there any way to really measure this?

One way, I think, is to look at the players teams pick in the seventh round. Many teams use seventh-rounders as dart throws, knowing no teams are going to lose their jobs if a draftee in the last round fails. Of course, all teams say they chose the best player available, but did they really just take the best athlete available?

Obviously, we can’t say anything conclusively. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, after all. However, we can look at the numbers over the past three drafts and see which teams seem to put a higher emphasis on athleticism, at least as measured by Relative Athletic Score. If you’re new to RAS, spend some time on this website. Basically, RAS gives you a more complete measure of a player’s testing scores. Not long ago, draftniks marveled at a player’s 40 time, but as popular analysis has matured, it’s become clear that a 170-pound guy running a 4.4 is not the same as when a 230-pound guy does it. OK, let’s look at the teams that value RAS most on Day 3, specifically, in Round 7.

Before we get started, 10.0 is a perfect RAS. Any score between 8.0 and 10.0 is considered in the green zone, i.e., exceptional athleticism. The next tier measures athleticism between 7.99 and 5.0, which is still better than average (that’s the orange zone). Anything below 5.0 is in the red zone and substandard for an NFL prospect.

  • Colts: Indy has picked four times in the seventh round the last three years. Every single one of them has had a 9+ RAS. As you (may) know, the Colts won a Best Draft Award for their picks in 2018.
  • Broncos: While some teams use their seventh-rounders as throw-ins, the Broncos are the opposite, having drafted in the seventh round seven times in the last three years (tied with the Broncos for the most in the league). How did they use those picks? Four of the seven are “green” (two were 9+) and all seven were 6.35 or higher. No “red” picks. By the way, like the Colts, the Broncos are a past Best Draft winner (for the 2021 draft).
  • Giants, Jets: Both teams have chosen just twice in the last three years, but each picked a 9+ and an 8+ RAS player when they did pick. Obviously, it’s a very limited sample, but still interesting.
  • Steelers: For a team with an old-school reputation, Pittsburgh sure seems attentive to workout numbers. Four picks, three greens, one orange.

On the other hand, which teams seem to spend their seventh-rounders based on other factors besides pure athleticism? Let’s take a look.

  • Cowboys: Dallas was tied for second in most seventh-rounders since 2024 with six, but is nowhere near as beholden to RAS as other teams. I think this is especially interesting given that the Cowboys are one of the teams that have most completely embraced analytics. Two of their picks didn’t even have RAS scores, which is usually an indication that the player was hurt and couldn’t test pre-draft. Another had a terrible RAS, though he’s more of a two-gap defensive tackle and those guys rarely have gleaming triangle numbers. Just one of the six had a 9+ score. Clearly, Dallas isn’t looking for freaks in Round 7.
  • Texans: Houston profiles very closely with its Lone Star cousin. One green, three orange (two of which had really blah numbers), one red, plus one no-RAS.
  • Seahawks: Seattle, which won a Best Draft Award for its work in the 2022 draft, doesn’t rely on lazy parameters to decide who to draft. Of their six seventh-rounders over the past three years, one was a no-RAS, one was a red, two were green, and two orange.

Also of note:

  • Of the top 10 RAS scores among seventh-rounders since 2024, the Colts have selected two of them (Oklahoma DE Jonah Laulu in 2024, who had a 9.62, and Kentucky OH Seth McGowan in April, who had a 9.47).
  • The Broncos drafted two in the top 15 highest RAS scores in the seventh round since 2024: South Carolina OC Nick Gargiulo in 2024 (9.45 RAS) and Utah TE Dallen Bentley this year (9.4).
  • The Jags and Ravens joined the Cowboys in drafting two players each with no RAS score.
  • The Patriots are the only team that picked two players with bottom 11 RAS scores among seventh-rounders over the last three years.