2012 NFL Pre-Combine
WR Rankings - No. 11 to 30
- 2013 Prospects:
- 2013 Prospects:
Follow Us ...
CFN Pre-Combine WR Rankings
CFN Pre-Combine Tight End Rankings
11. Joe Adams, Arkansas 5-11, 177 Proj. 4
Positives: Elite quickness. A killer at breaking down defenders in the open field. … Fast. He can take the top off a defense and can be used both as a deep threat and as a yard-after-the-catch playmaker. … An elite punt returner and could
grow into a kickoff returner. He’ll be used in a variety of ways.
Negatives: Not a No. 1 target in any way. Was part of the Arkansas puzzle and only caught three touchdown passes last year. … Doesn’t have the best hands. Too many drops and will put the ball on the turf with a big pop. … Very, very slight. He won’t block anyone and he’ll be pushed around by any NFL defensive back.
12. Stephen Hill, Georgia Tech (Jr.) 6-5, 200 Proj. 3
Positives: Huge and athletic. A mismatch nightmare of a deep threat. He might not be blazing fast, but he knows how to work deep and he’ll beat any defensive back for the jump ball. … Working himself into a player after a rocky start. He has improved his character and is maturing. Not the same guy who had academic issues a few years ago. … Incredible upside. Just scratching the surface and could be phenomenal with a little bit of tweaking.
Negatives: Not Demaryius Thomas and certainly not Calvin Johnson. Has the same size but doesn’t have anywhere near the same speed. … Not a natural receiver. Fights the ball a bit too much at times and needs plenty of reps and lots of practice time just making catches. … Has to be more than just a deep guy. He didn’t work in a passing offense.
13. Tommy Streeter, Miami (Jr.) 6-5, 210 Proj. 4
Positives: Phenomenal blend of size and speed. He has the frame to add at least 15 more pounds of muscle. … Could be a devastating deep threat. He might not do everything well, but he could make a big impact as a No. 3 outside target. … Good at finding holes in a defense. … A good athlete. He’ll win his share of battles on jump balls.
Negatives: A one-trick receiver. Doesn’t do everything and isn’t necessarily a short-range target. … Wiry. Has to hit the weight room hard. … Not sudden. Too straight line with his speed and isn’t going to be able to work the slot at the next level.
14. Jarius Wright, Arkansas 5-10, 176 Proj. 4
Positives: The best pure receiver on a strong passing attack. Joe Adams might be drafted higher because of his return ability, but Wright is the better pure receiver. … A terrific route runner who’s great out of his breaks to create separation. … Terrific in the open field and great in space. Let him make a cut and he’ll get open. … Fast. Can come up with the deep play.
Negatives: Too small. Not physical at all and will get shoved around by stronger defensive backs. … Not going to get bigger. He can’t add much more bulk and will have to survive on being a No. 3 target. … Some teams will think he’s a returner, but he’ll need work. He’s a receiver and has to be drafted as one.
15. Nick Toon, Wisconsin 6-1, 213 Proj. 4
Positives: Has a nice blend of size, speed, and athleticism. Can be used a little bit in every spot and can fit any system. … Good hands. He’ll take shots and can go across the middle or can work deep. Dependable. … Will block. A physical receiver who coaches love to use to make short running plays work.
Negatives: Gets way, WAY too much respect because of his name. He’s not his dad, Al Toon. … An okay athlete, but not great. While he has good tools, he’s not fast enough to be a top deep threat and he’s not quite quick enough to stand out against the better defensive backs. … Gets dinged. He played through problems, but he always seemed to have some issue.
16. Brian Quick, Appalachian State 6-4, 222 Proj. 3
Positives: Excellent size. Rocked up over the last year and filled out his frame. … A phenomenal athlete for his size. Should be a Combine star in the jumping drills. … Should be able to beat out most NFL corners on jump balls. Uses his size well and makes himself bigger with his leaping ability. … A fighter and a football player. He’ll do whatever he has to.
Negatives: While he improved during Senior Bowl week, he had some disastrous moments where he didn’t look like he belonged with the big boys. … Might have to work in short-to-midrange passing games. Could be most useful as a downfield blocker and a possession receiver even though he has deep speed. … Needs focus. Drops a few too many passes.
17. T.Y. Hilton, FIU 5-9, 178 Proj. 4
Positives: An unstoppable all-around playmaker in Sun Belt action. … Very, very quick and busts through his cuts and his breaks on a dime. … Tougher than his smallish size with the ability to go over the middle and the ability to take some big shots. He took a licking and kept on producing. … Can make a lot of money as a returner.
Negatives: Really, really small. He’s wiry and slight without the room to bulk up. This is what he’s going to be. … He’ll try hard, but he’ll be erased by anyone who can body up on him. … Can he last? He got popped and showed he could take it, but he’s going to have to work through a career of being banged up.
18. Gerrell Robinson, Arizona State 6-3, 223 Proj. 5
Positives: Great size and a terrific football player. He might not look too great in workouts, but he’ll be better on film. … A potentially great mid-range threat. He can be used on the outside and could blossom on the right team as a dominant No. 3 receiver. … A better deep ball target than he’ll get credit for. He’ll fight and battle for the ball. He’s not afraid to get physical.
Negatives: Doesn’t have elite athleticism. Fast, but not all that fast, and quick, but not sudden enough. … A bit of a one-year wonder. Blossomed last year with Brock Osweiler improving, he didn’t blow up until the second half of last year in Pac-12 play. Has to prove he can be consistent.
19. Ryan Broyles, Oklahoma 5-11, 185 Proj. 5
Positives: Phenomenally productive. Was the best of the Bob Stoops wide receivers. … Suffered from being in the same conference as Justin Blackmon. Would’ve won at least one Biletnikoff in just about any other year. … A pure receiver. Knows how to make cuts, get open, and do the little things a smart receiver knows what to do.
Negatives: And the great Oklahoma receiver in the NFL is ... ? … Not necessarily small, but he’s wiry and can get pushed around. Made a great college career out of running around in open spaces. … Getting past a torn ACL. If he loses at least a little bit of his quickness, he might not pan out. … Can’t block. He’ll try, but he won’t be able to do it.
20. T.J. Graham, NC State 5-11, 176 Proj. 5
Positives: Speed, speed, speed. Uncoachable speed. … If he’s not the fastest receiver at the Combine, he’ll be in the top three. … Can be used as a kickoff returner. … He’s a track guy and a football player and not a track guy who plays football. … A pure deep threat. He might be a one-trick target, but he could excel at the one thing.
Negatives: Not a good all-around receiver. He’s not going to be a midrange target and he won’t work too well in the slot. He’s an outside deep threat and a return man at the next level. Period. … Can’t get bigger. He’s rocked up on his 5-11 frame, and he won’t get physical. … He needs work. He might be worth it, but he’ll be a project.
21. Marvin Jones, California 6-2, 198 Proj. 6
Positives: Great hands. Sucks in just about everything that comes his way. … Nice size. Looks the part and isn’t wiry. He’s a strong-looking 6-2. … A fighter. He’ll battle for every ball and seems to love the challenge of going against the better defensive backs.
Negatives: Not all that productive for an NFL talent. A possession target who only scored 13 career touchdowns on 156 catches. … Used as a punt returner last year, but he doesn’t have the quickness to be an NFL returner. … An okay athlete. Doesn’t have top-shelf speed to be an NFL deep threat.
22. DeVier Posey, Ohio State 6-2, 209 Proj. 3
Positives: Has a No. 1 receiver attitude and a No. 1 mentality, in a good way. He wants the ball to come his way and he wants to be the main man. … A good pure pass catcher. He catches the ball well and is a natural when the ball is in the air. He’ll fight to make a catch. … A good athlete. A better football athlete than a workout warrior.
Negatives: A knucklehead when it comes to off-the-field issues. Nothing major or serious – he was part of the Tattoo Five and had some involvement with a booster – but he made some poor choices. … Not enough of an athlete. Not fast enough or quick enough to be a No. 1 or possibly even a No. 2. … Not a consistent route runner and disappeared way too often.
23. Eric Page, Toledo (Jr.) 5-10, 180 Proj. 4
Positives: A terrific all-around playmaker who did a little of everything. Was unstoppable late in 2011 catching ten passes or more in each of the final four games. … A good return man. An all-purpose yardage machine with good quickness and sudden cutting ability. … Never really got dinged up. Took a lot of hits and handled the ball over 400 times and held up fine. … Could have a long career as a jack-of-all-trades slot target and special teamer.
Negatives: Not all that fast for his size. Doesn’t have great straight line speed. … While he made a ton of catches, he was part of a system that force-fed him the ball. Okay at coming up with yards after the catch, not great. … When a defender gets a hand on him, the route is over.
24. Patrick Edwards, Houston 5-9, 168 Proj. 6
Positives: Fast. Great with the ball on the move and terrific and taking a pass for a bit play. … Terrific in space. Can cut well and make people miss on the fly and takes things to another level when he puts it in gear. … Phenomenally productive. Was Case Keenum’s main man.
Negatives: Very, very small. Slight and wiry. Won’t be physical in any way. … Not the most natural of receivers. Drops way too many passes. … Won’t do anything at the next level but be a deep speed target and maybe work as a slot receiver in four wide sets.
25. A.J. Jenkins, Illinois 6-0, 192 Proj. 4
Positives: Football fast. He might not have elite speed in workouts, but he can get deep. … Smart. Great in the classroom. … A nice pass catcher. He sucks in passes that come his way with soft hands. … Decent size. Just physical enough to not get shoved around.
Negatives: Had one really, really huge two week span – catching 18 passes for 550 yards and five scores against Northwestern and Indiana. … While he didn’t disappear, he didn’t help the cause during the team’s slide. … Needs a lot of polish as a route runner. Needs to show he can do more than just get deep.
26. B.J. Cunningham, Michigan State 6-1, 209 Proj. 6
Positives: Ultra-productive. Was a go-to receiver in big game after big game, and he always came through. … Strong. A thick target who’ll push around corners and isn’t afraid to do the dirty work. … He’ll fight for the ball. Throw it to a spot and he’ll find a way to get it.
Negatives: Not an athlete. Doesn’t have the deep speed or the quickness. … Had a few issues early in his career including being involved in a dorm fight. That was a while ago, but it’s still a bit of a red flag. … Doesn’t get out of his breaks well and isn’t a top route runner. Relied on bullying his way to get open and get the ball.
27. Jermaine Kearse, Washington 6-1, 212 Proj. FA
NOT INVITED TO THE COMBINE
Positives: Has a nice blend of size and speed. A good athlete with nice tools. … Had a few monster games and showed what he could do when the quarterbacks were hot. … Runs nice routes. He can work his way to get open and will fight for the ball.
Negatives: Good tools, not great ones. He’s missing the great speed and isn’t all that quick for a deep threat X receiver. … Doesn’t have NFL talent. He’s good enough to make a team and possibly be part of a system, but he’s not going to be a difference-maker. … Production didn’t drip off the map, but his only 100-yard day last year came in the shootout against Baylor and scored one touchdown in the final seven games.
28. Juron Criner, Arizona 6-2, 220 Proj. FA
Positives: Tall, athletic, and productive. Worked extremely well with Nick Foles both at Arizona and at the Senior Bowl. … A battler. He’ll fight for the ball and is constantly working to get open. … Moves well and cuts quickly. Could grow into a dependable and precise route runner.
Negatives: Decent speed, but not great wheels. He won’t get deep on a regular basis at the next level. … Was a part of a system that threw and threw and threw some more. … Needs to work on his game. He won’t be fast enough or talented enough to make the same plays in the pros he came up with in Arizona.
29. Jordan White, Western Michigan 6-0, 214 Proj. FA
Positives: 140 catches, 1,911 yards, 17 touchdowns. That was one year, and it’s not like it was only done in MAC play catching 12 passes against Michigan – in three quarters - 14 against Illinois and 12 against UConn. … Stocky, thick, aggressive receiver who runs great routes and pushes his way open. … Will do anything. Will go over the middle, will dive for the ball, and will sell out to block.
Negatives: Not all that fast, quick, or athletic. Won’t be able to get away from an NFL corner. … Major durability issues. Knee problems are always going to be a red flag. … A pure possession prospect. He might stick if he can be a perfect route runner, but he’ll never stretch the field.
30. Keshawn Martin, Michigan State 5-11, 190 Proj. 5
Positives: A terrific returner. He could hang on a roster as purely a special teamer, but he could also find a role as a No. 4 inside receiver. … Terrific speed. Not elite wheels, but he can make big things happen on the move. … Great in his cuts. Moves on a dime and shifts without having to gear down.
Negatives: Not a pure wide receiver. Needs a lot of work on doing all the little things right as a receiver. … A project. If he doesn’t rock as a punt returner right away, he’ll be an easy and quick cut. … Okay hands, but not great. Won’t help out his quarterback on missed throws.
CFN Pre-Combine WR Rankings
CFN Pre-Combine Tight End Rankings