jvill 51

That is compared to the average receiver, who weighs in at about 190-200 pounds

Yup, and it’s a hard question for me to answer if all the three top receivers are off the board. Admittedly I kind of stopped digging into the OT class once we brought in Tyron Smith and Moses, but I don’t think I’d put any of those guys beyond Alt and maybe Fashanu all that close to Bowers in terms of confidence that they’ll pan out while playing tackle specifically. Honestly, I think most people clamoring for a tackle are thinking about it all wrong and want the tackle for injury depth. Maybe Fashanu can step in right away in pass pro but I don’t trust most of these guys to be ready to protect Rodgers blindside as a rookie. If I’m taking a tackle it’s with the primary goal of developing them to take over in year 2. I’d still want to sign a vet swing tackle (Bakhtiari?) as my primary spot starter in case Smith or Moses go down. And if that’s the case I think I would prefer to trade down and take someone like Mims instead of taking anyone other than a WR or Bowers at 10.

I don't think the argument is (or should be) so much that you're paying him top tier money off the bat. Rather, it's that if you get say a WR there you're paying him as the 40th-ish highest player at that position. If you hit a home run and he's a top 10 player at WR you're saving yourself $15M+ per year compared to what he'd make on the open market. There's only 3 TEs in the league who make over 15M+ per year in total. There's a big opportunity cost there.

Fair on Kupp, but on the flip side the Rams also used tracking data to identify Nacua, and his numbers were bad across the board, especially his shuttle and 3 cone which were abysmal. None of this is dispositive, but pretty interesting I think. Still, I hear you re the lack of testing. But I guess my point is that while we might not have anything quantifiable, NFL teams have access to a lot more (and arguably more relevant) athleticism data. And I'd also push back against the notion a bit that we don't have anything quantifiable. PFF provides player tracking data to teams, and their athleticism metrics (not their subjective grading system) put him as a 99th percentile athlete (I believe the 3 numbers are junior, sophomore, freshman year): Reel Analytics provides player tracking data to college programs (and maybe NFL? not sure there) and they have him at a 99 athleticism grade, grading out ahead of the average wide receiver in certain metrics while carrying another 40-50 pounds. So there is data, it's just that the inputs aren't widely available to the general public. The teams however have the info. And when I look at the whole picture on Bowers, there is nothing that points to him being anything other than a special athlete other than rank speculation about why he didn't test. I'm comfortable with what's out there to make that assessment absent any real evidence to the contrary. Others may not be without testing data, and I can understand that. But we're not flying completely blind, and the NFL teams that actually have to make the decision aren't really flying blind at all. The smart teams in fact might be flying in clearer skies than they would have been say 15 years ago: with testing data but without player tracking metrics.

Theyre not just looking at top speed though, which in a vacuum is a flawed metric for sure without proper context. They can measure speed through cuts, stop/start ability, acceleration, etc. And they can do it in pads, in game situations and/or in actual football drills, and match it up precisely with the game film. Here’s a pretty decent article on the topic (behind Athletic paywall unfortunately but I’m sure there’s other similar write ups out there): https://theathletic.com/5236255/2024/02/03/nfl-player-tracking-system-speed-prospects/

Fair. I would just be more worried about it if a) there was anything at all besides speculation that “he’s hiding” that points to him not being a great athlete, because everything else that I’ve seen says that he is; and b) we didn’t have the tech we do now to track players athleticism in games and in practice.

I agree that athleticism is important. I do wish we had the testing numbers. But pretty much every data point we do actually have says he is a special athlete. In game player tracking data from PFF (which I’m assuming is more than just top speed in MPH which I agree is flawed) has him as a 99th percentile athlete. Another player tracking site has him at a 99 athletic score. The way Georgia utilized him says special athlete. Anecdotes from the Georgia coaching staff about his exceptional tracking numbers from their practices say special athlete. The puff pieces and unconfirmed accounts of him running 40s at 4.5 in HS say special athlete. None of this is perfect, all the above have flaws, and I can’t speak specifically on the methodology of the PFF and other player tracking site. But I haven’t seen anything not based on pretty out there conjecture that contradicts the idea that he’s in that tier, which is where I’d pretty firmly place him based on the dreaded “eye test” as well.

Yeah I just don’t get using it as a knock when he’s clearly also shown the ability to win downfield. If anything I think it just goes to show you how great of an athlete and football player he actually is. Facing the stiffest competition and playing for national championships, they built their offense around getting the ball into the hands of a 240 pounder and letting him go to work. There’s quotes from Monken I believe going into his sophomore season about how his GPS numbers were so unreal that they changed the offense to feature him more in this way. That was only expanded on his junior year. When that didn’t work (and to be clear I don’t think it will work nearly as effectively against NFL defenders because duh) and they got into the rare tight game like the second half against Auburn this year, they had to work down the field more. And Bowers just destroyed them and basically won the game by himself (starting at around 1:15 below).

I always find it interesting, but not sure how valuable it is. Like you said, sometimes they vary so widely even on the same topic that it’s tough to find a takeaway. Also think some of these guys might get too much joy out of seeing their quotes in print - case in point the guy saying Bowers would run a 4.8 which is ridiculous. The eye test can certainly be deceiving and I’m getting older, but I’m not blind yet I don’t think.

I get wishing there were testing numbers on Bowers. I also get why didn’t run, especially if he initially tweaked his hamstring training for the 40 instead of training for football like he said. But GPS tracking, which is more and more being used by NFL teams as a better indicator of play speed than the combine numbers, puts him as an exceptional athlete at least according to PFF’s player tracking:

I doubt it. Which is why I added the caveat that if that was all he showed in college I’d understand the criticism more.

I should caveat this to say that I’d understand this point if we didn’t have 3 years of production and film to go off of showing him winning in pretty much all areas. But, we do have that. He’s not my top choice, but that has almost nothing to do with him as a prospect, and everything to do with the economics of the pick.

I have a couple of minor concerns about Bowers (some catch technique issues on jump balls led to him not pulling down as many as he should have in 2023 and it’ll be tough for him to be more than just adequate as an inline blocker due to his size), this particular one that’s the new flavor of the month seems absurd to me. “This guy is such a freak that the best team in college football, in the best conference in college football, was running friggin jet sweeps with their 240 pound tight end just to get the ball in his hands as quickly as possible, and that is very concerning. Oh and also we’re not sure if he’s a freak because he didn’t test.” Not sure what we’re doing here.