Goodberry's 2025 NFL Draft Sheet

[BurrowDeep2Chase]

Draft Sheet

 

[Cincyfan78]

Draft Sheet

I'm a fan of Goodberry. I like how he digs deeper than just the tape or even just the workouts. They have a nice little formula and it's been right far more often than wrong.

His work is a big reason why I do not want Stewart or Booker in round 1...or really in round 2...but shows that I think if Nolen is there at 17, he's feeling more and more like the pick. You can still go IOL or DE in round 2...and round 3 will offer more depth at either spot as well.

The Bengals have so many needs, and they are going to be so many fits, that it really is hard to try and nail down exactly where they will go because it could be truly more about who lands at their spot than anything.

 

[BurrowDeep2Chase]

What stands out to me is Mykel Williams is ranked #171. That is crazy low for someone expected to go in the 1st. He has shown up on our mocks numerous times.

 

[Cincyfan78]

What stands out to me is Mykel Williams is ranked #171. That is crazy low for someone expected to go in the 1st. He has shown up on our mocks numerous times.

Lot's of production red flags. I think he is a lot like Murphy in that he has 1st round physical traits. Teams are always going to hedge on the side of "ability" when they are elite looking...but, what I feel so many teams (not just the Bengals) miss is that they had those abilities against guys who they should have DOMINATED - and they didn't. Why does everyone suddenly think that they will dominate against guys who are as good as, or better in some cases, than they are?

Stewart is another one. Guy is talked about in the 1st round based on his physical traits. He's a specimen. He had one of the worst pass-rush win%/rates in all of college. How can you be that physically dominant and get so little production? It's like, some guys are simply TRYING not to make plays. They are clearly more physically gifted than those across from them, but they fail to produce time after time.

To me - that's a massive issue that I would stay away from. I'd rather error on the production side than the physical side. However, you can find some guys who are tweeners at either side, and based on fit/need - they can work...but when guys are so bad athletically and have stats - you have to wonder how will they hold up against top tier NFL talent...I think more focus should be spent on the other side of that coin, which is "How can you take a guy who should physically dominate and doesn't to such a degree that they have no productive stats". I think that is just as important, IMO.

 

[Cincyfan78]

To add - I get taking a guy as a 2-3 year project guy. Murphy was talked a lot about being a guy that wasn't expected to really produce much in year 1, and likely year 2...they were talking years 3-4-5...we'll see if that pans out...but I feel like with 1st round guys, most teams just can't afford to take guys who take 2-3 years to develop. That's fine if it's a 6th rounder you are taking a flyer on (Matt Lee comes to mind)...and where you can likely sign them to a 2nd contract pretty cheap before they get into the meat of their ability.

But when you are drafting guys in rounds 1-2-3: They need to be starter level guys much sooner than later. At worst, they should be top tier rotational guys right off the bat. To do it any other way is to continually put your organization behind the 8-ball with drafting.

 

[BurrowDeep2Chase]

To add - I get taking a guy as a 2-3 year project guy. Murphy was talked a lot about being a guy that wasn't expected to really produce much in year 1, and likely year 2...they were talking years 3-4-5...we'll see if that pans out...but I feel like with 1st round guys, most teams just can't afford to take guys who take 2-3 years to develop. That's fine if it's a 6th rounder you are taking a flyer on (Matt Lee comes to mind)...and where you can likely sign them to a 2nd contract pretty cheap before they get into the meat of their ability.

But when you are drafting guys in rounds 1-2-3: They need to be starter level guys much sooner than later. At worst, they should be top tier rotational guys right off the bat. To do it any other way is to continually put your organization behind the 8-ball with drafting.

Early-Mid 1st rounders need to be Week 1 starters IMO. You can take more risk late in the 1st round.

 

[Cincyfan78]

Early-Mid 1st rounders need to be Week 1 starters IMO. You can take more risk late in the 1st round.

If you are a team that is pretty well put together, I"d agree. The Bengals are not in that area. They need guys up and down the roster that can help right now. That might mean taking a guy with a bit lower ceiling, but a much higher floor. I'm OK with that, but where they are, at 17, I feel like they will have multiple options to grab a guy that can help right now.

 

[Cincyfan78]

Goodberry also put this out today. True pass sets have been pretty solid in predicting NFL success. Surprisingly, Booker is well up there - but my issues with him are more about his physical nature and him ONLY being a true G - never having played any other position. For a C, that's not uncommon, but most G usually play some OT - Booker did not.

 

[Cincyfan78]

From Goodberry - found interesting since @CrashDavisSports has a mancrush on Nick....lol

According to PFF, Nick Emmanwori's best games came against Clemson, Kentucky and Oklahoma.The draft community has access to film from the Missouri, Alabama, LSU and Texas A&M games. Those were 4 of his 5 lowest scoring games from PFF.

He's clearly got the physical traits - but against high(er) level competition - he was negated by a large margin. I would think this could be an area of concern for teams - and why I've started to see him suddenly start falling in a lot of media mocks after a few weeks of steadily climbing into the mid-1st round, even. Now, it seems most have him back down at the end of round 1, and a few in round 2.

 

[Cincyfan78]

 

[DanBengalfan]

I honestly haven't watched enough college football to have a favorite.

but thanks for posting the information.

 

[Cincyfan78]

I honestly haven't watched enough college football to have a favorite.

but thanks for posting the information.

I don't know all the players - but I love the information. You get guys like Stewart who just look to be THE part. They also are great athletes and workout warriors, so they always test well. However, if you turn on the tape and then see that he had the WORST runstop% and pass-rush win rate...you start to wonder - if he's just a dude that looks good in his underwear, ya know?

Conversely - you get a guy who you aren't sure - tests good, maybe not great, but you put on the film and then look at the stats, and you start to realize...yeah...the guy just plays. I'd rather err on the side of production all day. You may not end up with an elite level guy, but you raise the floor of your team considerably.

Of course - there are always times to take chances, and things that coaches feel they see they can correct - I'm not saying there is 1-size fits all - but when fans fall in love with certain players, and then those guys don't get drafted high, or where they thought they would go - this kind of context can help tell a much bigger story than what a lot of the media, and fans, fall in love with - which is the combine and flash numbers.