Could BC’s Donovan Ezeiruaku be reunited with Jeff Hafley?
First round prospect, Boston College defensive end Donovan Ezeiruaku played for Packers defensive coordinator Jeff Hafley for three seasons.
Could BC’s Donovan Ezeiruaku be reunited with Jeff Hafley?
The Packers have a need for another pass rusher. Donovan Ezeiruaku was second in the nation in sacks last year with 16.5 sacks. He was recruited by and played for current Packers defensive coordinator Jeff Hafley. He was also coached at BC by assistant defensive line coach Vince Oghobaase.
Do all of these connections add up in a few weeks, resulting in the Packers drafting Ezeiruaku on Thursday or Friday night of the draft?
Ezeiruaku is a very intriguing prospect in this year’s NFL draft. He comes out of Boston College, playing four years for the Eagles, finishing with 28 sacks in four seasons. He’s a 6-foot-2, 248 pound defensive end.
His size however is a bit smaller than Packers General Manager Brian Gutekunst has gone for in his edge players since becoming the team’s GM.
Donovan Ezeiruaku (#6) vs. North Carolina in 2024 pic.twitter.com/zg3inrRUaU
— Nate Tice (@Nate_Tice) April 4, 2025
These are the sizes for the Packers current edge group: Rashan Gary 6-5, 277; Kingsley Enagbare 6-4, 258; Lukas Van Ness 6-5, 272; Brenton Cox 6-4, 250
Ezeiruaku is a few years shorter than all of those players. There’s a chance he’s already off the Packers board in Rounds 1 or 2 because of his size alone.
Donovan Ezeiruaku supercut 💨
The bend and pass rush bag is DISGUSTING pic.twitter.com/fmwSfFncOH
— NFL Draft Files (@NFL_DF) March 17, 2025
However, his production and ability to bend around the edge as a pass rusher are both very enticing, in a position group that the Packers have not addressed yet in free agency.
In Daniel Jeremiah’s top 50 prospect rankings on NFL.com, Ezeiruaku ranks 25th among all players. https://www.nfl.com/news/daniel-jeremiah-s-top-50-2025-nfl-draft-prospec...
Below is Jeremiah’s evaluation of Ezeiruaku.
Ezeiruaku is a compact edge rusher with outstanding length, burst and production. In the pass game, he has a very quick first step and gets on top of blockers in a hurry. He excels at prying open the outside shoulder and cornering toward the quarterback. He has a full array of moves to complement his speed rush. He has won with a club/swim, inside counter, spin move and Euro step. He’s an outstanding finisher (16.5 sacks in 2024). Against the run, he needs to be more consistent using his length to stack blocks. He takes them on with his shoulder too often. He shows solid effort on the back side to chase plays. Overall, Ezeiruaku has an ideal body type to rush the passer, and he has all the tricks in his bag to win against good players.
The Packers have invested a lot of draft resources in the front seven. Would another first round defensive end be too many after drafting Van Ness just two years ago?
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.
__________________________
Mitch McLaughlin is a Packers fan and shareholder residing in Sacramento, California. He will be writing Packers stories each week on Cheesehead TV. He can be found on Twitter: @McLaughlinMitch
__________________________
Comments (47)
Leatherhead
April 06, 2025 at 02:26 pm
Defensive End is our biggest need!! All we have is Gary, VanNess, and Enagbare.
This would make a lot more sense than drafting somebody who would help us score more points.
GregC
April 06, 2025 at 03:07 pm
We also have Brenton Cox, who is a better pass rusher than Van Ness and Enagbare.
I'm not sold on taking a DE early either. I think WR is far and away the biggest need, followed by DT.
I keep hearing how this is a great draft for edge players, then when I read the breakdowns or listen to them on youtube, almost every one of the top edge players has at least one huge flaw. With this guy, it's his lack of ability to defend the run. He is a bit lighter than what the Packers prefer, although personally I don't have a problem with him weighing two pounds less than Brenton Cox. He could possibly be a situational pass rusher as a rookie, with an expectation that he could eventually become an every-down player.
Most people seem to think he could be drafted right around where the Packers pick in the first round. PFF ranks him as the 16th best prospect in the draft, but they say he should be drafted on day two, which makes zero sense.
dblbogey
April 06, 2025 at 03:49 pm
I think Cox is an exceptional talent and could be a nice surprise this year. I also think this is a strong year for DT and we have a huge need for a good one in the first round.
Leatherhead
April 06, 2025 at 07:51 pm
So which DT do you cut? Wyatt? Brooks? Wooden? Clark?
LLCHESTY
April 06, 2025 at 08:15 pm
Whoever gets beat out. Simple.
Coldworld
April 06, 2025 at 03:56 pm
Gary is good enough. Van Ness has yet to prove he’s adequate. Enagbare took a step back last year and may be the least suited to the new system.
Gary aside, the nearest thing we have to a proven threat is Cox but he’s only had about 60 rushing snaps. The rest are question marks at best.
Yes, we do need help at DE. Badly.
Leatherhead
April 06, 2025 at 05:23 pm
How on Earth did Enagbare take a step back last year?
He was once again available for all 17 games. With a similar number of snaps to the two previous seasons, he got more sacks, more tackles, more pressures, more tackles for loss, more forced fumbles.
I can't imagine what else Van Ness would have to do in his first two seasons to be considered 'Adequate'.
1) Available for every game both seasons
2) 7 sacks, 65 tackles, 22 pressures.
3) 800 snaps, 300 more on special teams.
We do NOT need help at DE, badly. We've got 4 very capable DEs under contract already.......or is this one of these things where you're going to say that we have the #6 defense despite barely adequate play at the DE spot?
If you don't win the LOS on defense, you're going to get scored on.
splitpea1
April 06, 2025 at 03:17 pm
Maybe worth consideration in the second round, as he is a specialist and wouldn't be considered an every-down player yet. He does have a heck of lot more experience and refinement than Van Ness, though. If you take Ezeiruaku, on one hand you're creating a logjam at edge, but on the other hand, you have insurance in case Van Ness stays stuck in neutral or someone else gets injured. It might not matter as Ezeiruaku is likely to go somewhere between the Packers' first and second round selection.
dblbogey
April 06, 2025 at 03:46 pm
Unless our new DL line coach is the best DL line coach in history, I have little hope for Van Ness. He'll be a rotation guy for 2 more years on a rookie contract and then be gone. I'm afraid Gute fell in love with his RAS and looking like Hercules, and didn't notice he had no pass rushing moves. Oh well, still support Gute, just don't blow another 1st rounder this year.
GregC
April 06, 2025 at 04:35 pm
I think it's still too early to give up on Van Ness. Also, I don't agree with the narrative that Gute fell in love with his RAS and overdrafted him. Van Ness was taken right around where most people thought he would be taken. We will likely see Shemar Stewart drafted high this year for the same reasons, even though he was a lot less productive in college than Van Ness was.
Leatherhead
April 06, 2025 at 05:09 pm
Way too early, unless you're into premature evaluation. The dude is 23 and had done more in his first two years than many, many DEs. And he's done it while changing defensive coordinators and going from a 3-4 to a 4-3.
Our DEs are Gary, Van Ness, and Enagbare. They got 75% of our DE snaps. Preston Smith, and then Brenton Cox, got the rest. They were part of the #6 overall defense last year, and a top run defense as well. I think the focus on their sacks is blinding people to what they're getting done, which is that they don't give up very many yards or points and they're kind of hard to run against.
If DE is where we NEED to spend our first round pick, then I'm a monkey's uncle.
LLCHESTY
April 06, 2025 at 06:43 pm
Taking needs in the 1st round is how you end up with shitty 1st round picks.
Leatherhead
April 06, 2025 at 07:45 pm
Chesty....have you ever assembled a team?
You take care of your needs first. Teams that take what they want instead of what they need are called the Cleveland Browns.
Oppy
April 06, 2025 at 07:54 pm
You couldn't be more wrong.
If you draft based purely on need, you often end up taking players that aren't the best available player on the board- in other words, REACHING- to fill your need.
If you have a need, and it just so happens that of the top remaining players (of any position) left on the board, there's a guy who plays the position you need, then by all means, you take the need... but that's drafting BPA.
If you select for need- when you're on the clock and there are significantly more talented players at other positions, but you select 'the best remaining player at (the position of need)', you end up taking lesser talent than you could have had, just to plug the hole.
LLCHESTY
April 06, 2025 at 08:34 pm
You also leave better players for other teams. Two bad things.
LLCHESTY
April 06, 2025 at 08:31 pm
Reaching for needs in the 1st round is what losing teams do. With FA and the turnover in the modern NFL you try to find great players and fill needs later.
Coldworld
April 07, 2025 at 09:01 am
Unusually there is more than one player similarly rated. If not, you take the stand out, but typically BPA really means the player felt to be the best candidate to improve us the most.
Thus it’s not a calculation that’s typically divorced from what you have and therefore, from need: it’s a blend.
Whether that player is felt to be a plug-and-play proposition or a guy who will need time, but offers excessive upside, is part of the rating evaluation. That too can vary in weighting by where a FO thinks the team is in terms of development.
LLCHESTY
April 06, 2025 at 05:36 pm
I'd like to see them add a bendy type that they currently don't have. Edge players with a sub 4.7 40 and sub 7 second 3-cone have the 2nd highest hit rate since 2010. Ashton Gillotte cracked those numbers at 264 lbs. He's 113 on the consensus board because he's short with short arms but had 141 pressures in the last three years. Tough and relentless player.
Leatherhead
April 06, 2025 at 07:50 pm
Then which defensive end would you not dress out?
Gary? VanNess? Enagbare? Cox?
LLCHESTY
April 06, 2025 at 08:39 pm
Whoever he beats out. Why is that so hard to understand? I said the same thing about drafting a center last year, look how that turned out.
Leatherhead
April 07, 2025 at 07:07 am
Yes, so let's just draft and develop people without any plan at all, and we'll just discard resources, because that's the way you get stronger as a team. In fact, let's spend our first round pick on a QB and see if he can beat out Love!!
Meanwhile, that draft pick could have been used on a guy who would actually fill a hole on the roster.
And when, exactly, is this new DE supposed to beat somebody out? During OTAs and minicamps because he looks good in shorts? During the preseason? No, because we don't play our main dogs in the preseason. So when is he supposed to beat these people out before the 53 man roster is made? In training camp, no-contact drills?
IMO, you seem to think the 1265 brass wakes up with a new idea every day, and there's no planning about succession at the various positions, and no awareness that you only dress a certain number of people. It's a very haphazard view, and I don't think it's correct.
GregC
April 06, 2025 at 09:06 pm
If they use a high pick on a DE, I think Enagbare will be the odd man out. Obviously it wouldn't be Gary, and it's too early to give up on Van Ness. Cox played really well once he got into the lineup halfway through last season. He appears to be an ascending player. Enagbare is a pretty good rotational player, but he may have reached his ceiling. He would get a chance to compete for a roster spot in training camp, though.
Leatherhead
April 07, 2025 at 07:11 am
Then why not wait one more year and replace Enagbare then? It's better than just throwing a half full can of beer away so you can go get another one.
Enagbare is a good player for us....and he plays special teams.
You get the point, though, unlike chesty. It's not Gary, it's not Van Ness. I don't think it should be Enagbare or Cox. I think you should use that draft pick to address an area where we're thinner. All that a high pick is going to do is force another good player off the roster.
GregC
April 07, 2025 at 08:23 am
The reason for drafting a player to replace Enagbare would be to get a player with more upside and/or a different skillset that would better complement the other DEs. I'm not pounding the table for it like most people here, but I'm open to the idea. T.J. Slaton is a good player, and they are replacing him. You should always be looking to replace your average players with above average players. But of course, we don't know what the coaches and front office staff think of Enagbare. Maybe they think he can be better this year. He's still a young player.
Leatherhead
April 07, 2025 at 08:32 am
They replaced Slaton AFTER his contract was over.
My son came over yesterday, and he saw me throwing three cans of Pabst in the trash. "Why, Dad?"
"Well, I want to make room for the Heineken I want to buy"
"Why don't you just finish your Pabst and then get the Heineken?""
"Because I'm trying to replace average beer with above average beer".
LLCHESTY
April 07, 2025 at 10:26 am
So don't draft a potential 10 sack a year guy if he's 1st on your board to keep Enagbare for one more year. Got it.
If rookie comes in and beats out a veteran you've improved your team. Keeping an average player instead makes a lot of sense.
This is kind of like your argument that they should have kept Barry instead of finding a better DC.
stockholder
April 06, 2025 at 08:37 pm
I tried to fit Donovan Ezeirauku. ER/LB BC.
Just so he could be with his old coach.
But he'll end up as a Part -Timer.
Gute likes Bull rushers.
Landon Jackson will be the next JJ Watt.
And truthfully Campbell would give them more.
But you should know by now.
CB sets Gute's draft. He must replace Stokes.
And Alexander won't be here next year.
Hobbs was signed to play the Slot.
My belief is CB @23 and Cb @ 54 again.
Mock that.
Leatherhead
April 07, 2025 at 08:34 am
Stokes has been replaced, his name is Hobbs. He'll be a boundary corner, mostly, despite your assertion that he was drafted to play the slot. Bullard is our slot guy,
There will be no CBs in the Top 100 for us.
henthjessica
April 07, 2025 at 02:24 am
If you're wondering how Sun Country cancellation Policy works, you have come to the proper place for all the information you want about their cancellation policy.
Lphill
April 07, 2025 at 05:31 am
Packers have 4 edge rushers already and Cooper showed he can as well , Packers need a disruptive interior D lineman more than an edge rusher .
Leatherhead
April 07, 2025 at 08:35 am
Packers have no edge rushers, because we play a 4-3 and use Defensive Ends who are required to play the run AND the pass.
Our interior Dline: Clark, Wyatt, Brooks, Wooden. Who do you want to throw away?
LLCHESTY
April 07, 2025 at 10:55 am
How stubborn and myopic can you be? All outside rushers, whether DEs or OLBs are called Edge players now.
How many times are you going to ask the same ridiculous question? You act like all their DTs are All-Pros when none of them are. I'd be more than fine with a rookie beating out Wooden and Brooks needs to improve to keep his backup 3T job. If they draft a guy like Harmon or Nolan and they think he can be as good of a pass rusher as Wyatt while being better in run D they can let Wyatt go next year. Clark is most likely gone after this year as well. This DT class in years after a bunch that were pretty weak, I'd be fine with them drafting three of them if a DT is the highest player on their board in the 6th or 7th round.
You seem quite content to let average or below average be the enemy of great.
Leatherhead
April 07, 2025 at 11:14 am
Oh, they are? So is DE just not a position anymore, or is it only a position on the 3-4? You keep saying "outside pass rushers". Do they have any responsibilities against the run at all? Or do they just rush the passer on every play?
Yes, get rid of good players to make room for a guy that you THINK might stay healthy and be better. That's YOUR stubborn myopia.
And again, since you don't answer it.....when is this rookie going to beat out Brooks? In the OTAs and minicamps, because he looks so good in shorts?
In limited contact practices? In the preseason games (where we don't play the guys he's trying to beat out)?
The intelligent people running the team don't think "Let's just draft some guy and see if he can beat out some other guy we already have under contract". They have a much longer view of things than that. When they draft a guy, they want to keep him for the full four years. This is called a Plan, and they don't change it every day. When they drafted Brooks and Wooden, the plan was to develop these guys. You want to give up after two years,despite the fact they've both played pretty well.
Heading into the draft, we have a clear need at WR. There are other spots on the 53 still open, like the 9th OL and the 5th CB. There is simply no reason to spend a high pick on a guy to beat out another guy who isn't the problem in the first place....when you have other spots that are open and need help.
LLCHESTY
April 07, 2025 at 11:43 am
When did Doubs beat out Amari Rodgers? Before you saw it coming that's for sure. Even with today's limited practice times coaches can still evaluate rookies and see who deserves playing time more. Stop acting like every pick they make turns out because most don't. Wooden has been below average and is easily replaceable with a better player. Standing pat doesn't get SB wins.
Leatherhead
April 07, 2025 at 12:24 pm
Colby Wooden. Plays about 25% of the defensive snaps, and some special teams. Has been available for 30 out of 34 games. He was a 4th round draft choice.
Why on Earth would you just give up on him after 2 years? That doesn't seem like a very good use of resources.
Stop acting like every guy in the draft is better than who we already have, because they aren't. Nobody is saying "stand pat". It's more like "apply your resources where they'll do the most good.".
LLCHESTY
April 07, 2025 at 01:26 pm
The Packers have some good young players but that doesn't mean every young players is going to be good. Wooden is a below average player and those type of players can be easily replaced. You would have kept Amari Rodgers for 4 years because he was a 3rd round pick. The best thing a team can do is forget where a player was taken the moment the draft is over.
I doubt they add a safety or RB in the draft. All other positions should expect to compete for their spot on the team.
Lphill
April 07, 2025 at 01:55 pm
so don't improve a position if a better player is available ? ok
Leatherhead
April 07, 2025 at 03:54 pm
Completely wrong. We could improve several different positions with our first pick. Which one is the most important? Which helps the team more?
We're trying to improve the TEAM.
crayzpackfan
April 07, 2025 at 02:13 pm
LH
You sure do enjoy taking the "red pill" on some of these topics. Curious actually. Keep on trudging forward I guess?
Leatherhead
April 07, 2025 at 03:55 pm
When people who are wrong 90% of the time are arguing with me, I feel I'm on the right track.
LLCHESTY
April 07, 2025 at 06:29 pm
Amari Rodgers, Barry repeatedly(and then spending half of last season saying Hafley wasn't an improvement) and Myers. Examples of you being stubbornly wrong off the top of my head. Sometimes I think you enjoy being wrong.
Leatherhead
April 07, 2025 at 06:41 pm
Not wrong on Barry. Add McKinney and Cooper and Bullard and Williams to what Barry was working with and see how big the improvement is. Hafley wasn't an improvement during the first half of the season. Myers was the center on a good offensive line on a good offensive team
I was wrong on Amari Rodgers. I've never seen the Packers give up on a Day 2 pick in less than 2 years.
Now, I'm going to start listing the things that you've been wrong about. I'll probably have to break it into sections because it's pretty lengthy, but it's the first 3.
1. Doubs was going to catch 50 balls for 500 yards as a rookie, which almost no Day 3 rookies ever do.
2. That yards/rush defense was some damning metric that was more important than points. Paradoxically,you also said it was a game of chunk plays. So which is it? Chunk plays or 0.3 yards/rush difference?
3. That we wouldn't draft Sean Rhyan because his arms were short.
I'll be back with the other 30 soon.
.
LLCHESTY
April 07, 2025 at 09:59 pm
Not wrong on Barry and yet he got fired and most likely never gets a DC job in the NFL again. Is that why Myers got paid so damn much?
I never predicted a number for Doubs, merely that he'd be the 4th receiver ahead of Amari. But refresh my memory, did he come closer to those numbers than Amari?
You're a damn liar, Sean Rhyan was never on my radar until they drafted him. I'm sure I mentioned Morgan's short arms after they drafted him, in the context that they might be planning on moving him to guard. Brugler thought he would be the best guard in the draft. Where he ends up remains to be seen. I do recall you saying he'd beat out Walker after he was drafted. Wrong again.
Leatherhead
April 08, 2025 at 09:39 am
Yes, you did.
You are a damn liar.
Please....just ignore me, and I'll ignore you. I think you're an idiot.
LLCHESTY
April 08, 2025 at 09:14 pm
If you weren't such an idiot I would!🤣
Lphill
April 07, 2025 at 01:53 pm
Clark his time is up .
advdj76
April 07, 2025 at 03:10 pm
Nobody, if they draft DT, he is going to replace Slaton