Create Account

Or log in with Facebook


Log in

Or log in with Facebook

NFL Draft Scouting Report: Marcus Davenport, Edge, UTSA

NFL Draft Scouting Report: Marcus Davenport, Edge, UTSA

Marcus Davenport – UTSA Roadrunners


Position: Edge/Defensive End
Height: 6'6"
Weight: 264
Year: Senior
Hometown: San Antonio, TX
Experience: Sr. - 3 year starter



40yd dash: 4.58
Broad jump: 124”
Vertical: 33.5”
3-cone: 7.2
20yd. Shuttle: 4.41
Bench Press: 22 reps


Career Notes:

As a San Antonio native, Davenport came out of high school as a well-accomplished three-sport athlete (football, basketball, track), but decided to stay near home and help build up the young UTSA football program instead of going to a bigger program in another part of the country. As a true freshman, he saw action in 11 games, recording 14 tackles and 2.5 sacks, before comprising a full-time starting role as a sophomore in 2015.

As a tall and thin defensive end, only carrying 225 pounds on his 6-foot-6 frame, Davenport registered four sacks, four hurries, and 7.5 tackles for loss in 2015. However, the athletic pass rusher took a big jump his junior year. Playing 10 pounds heavier, he made a more consistent impact on the field, finishing the year with 68 tackles, 10 tackles for loss, 6.5 sacks, and eight quarterback hurries.

Finally, in 2017, Davenport fully grew into his frame. Playing around 260 pounds, the towering defensive end showed much more power in his game and created more havoc off the edge. He led the team in sacks for the second year in a row with eight. He also topped off his senior season with 55 tackles, 17 tackles for loss, four pass breakups, three forced fumbles and eight hurries. He was named the 2017 Conference USA Defensive Player of the Year.

Davenport most of his snaps his final two years at UTSA as a standup rusher, and many project him to be versatile enough to play either 4-3 defensive end or 3-4 outside linebacker in the NFL. After an impressive Senior Bowl performance and NFL Combine workout, Davenport’s draft stock has been steadily rising. Most analysts project him to go in the middle of the first round, while it seems clear his floor is the middle of the second round.


Injury Report:

Davenport didn’t sustain any major injuries during his four years at UTSA, but he did miss a total of two games with minor injuries his freshman (North Texas) and sophomore year (Colorado State).


Career Stats



Athleticism: 4.0/5.0

Davenport has been touted as a freak athlete in draft media, and while there is a lot of truth to this, it doesn’t paint the entire picture. His 4.58 forty-time puts him in the 95th percentile for athletes of his size. His broad jump was also good enough for the 91st percentile. It is clear on tape Davenport is a very explosive athlete with a quick first step and impressive straight-line burst. However, there is still a lot of stiffness to his game. He plays very upright and shows awkward change of direction when playing in space. His lateral movement can also be a bit sluggish at times. He shows very little bend when rushing around the edge, and while he can win with power, length, and burst, he is not a flexible athlete who can dip under a tackle’s shoulder pads and carve a tight corner to the quarterback.

Run Stop: 4.5/5.0   

By his senior year at UTSA Davenport became a real force against the run. He uses his size and length well to take on blocks and set a strong edge. He also has a strong punch off the snap and will knock linemen back on their heels. His awareness is also above average and he doesn’t bite too often on misdirection or pitch plays. He’s an aggressive defender who will track ball carriers down and make a stop in pursuit. Given his size and strength, he’s a handful for opposing offenses to contain on the edge. He can easily chuck tight ends, and he very rarely gives ground a the point of attack, even when double teamed. He would be a very reliable strongside defender on the edge.

Pass Rush: 4.0/5.0  

Davenport flashes impressive burst out of his stance, which also enables him to rush with a lot of power. Once he gets his hands on a lineman’s chest, he can own the matchup and drive his man back into the pocket. This in and of itself creates a lot of problems for opposing quarterbacks. He also has some speed around the edge. However, Davenport doesn’t show a repertoire of pass rush moves. He primarily bull rushes, and if he can’t win with power, then he lacks a counter move to prevent a stalemate. He also doesn’t change up his approach enough to keep his opponent on his heels. This could be a real problem at the next level. NFL tackles will quickly learn Davenport’s tendencies, and he won’t be able to just outmuscle them like he could against Conference USA competition.

Coverage: 2.5/5.0

I don’t anticipate NFL teams using Davenport very often in coverage. He’s a bit awkward moving out in space and is a far better straight-line athlete. His explosion off the line would be wasted dropping in coverage. However, he will be asked to do it occasionally if he is selected by a 3-4 team. He was so rarely asked to play in coverage at UTSA, so this will be a part of his game he would have to really work on developing if he would have to make the transition to outside linebacker in a 3-4 system.

Impact: 4.0/5.0

It seems Davenport was just hitting his stride as a player in his final year at UTSA. 17 tackles for loss and 8.5 sacks his senior year show he can make disruptive plays on the field. However, over half of his sacks came against Rice and North Texas. Against better offensive lines, like UTEP or Colorado State, Davenport had very quiet games. His level of competition has to be a concern. Given his size and athletic traits, he should have consistently dominated Conference USA competition.

Summary: Davenport has very exciting and rare athletic traits for a player his size. On potential alone, he will most likely be drafted in the first round, even though I view him as a Day 2 prospect based on his tape. Teams will chomp at the bit to get ahold of him and see what they can mold him into. However, he’s definitely a project player and there is a lot of risk with selecting him. He rarely faced top-level competition in college. His effort and performance wasn’t always consistent on the field, and his interviews were reportedly concerning at the NFL Combine. Many wonder how much he really loves football. Davenport might not give a team immediate impact on the field, but with the right coaching he could be a game-changing player several years down the road. He’s a classic boom-or-bust prospect.

Overall Grade: 3.90/5.0  


If drafted by the Packers:

Davenport would give them a tall athletic body to feature on the edge. He could serve a similar role in their defense that Julius Peppers filled--however, I am by no means saying he’s the same caliber player or will have the same impact. Regardless, the former UTSA standout would give them a scheme versatile player who could be a standup rusher in 3-4 looks or play defensive end if the Packers want to mix it up with some four-man fronts. Davenport would also be afforded the luxury of developing behind two veteran starters in Clay Matthews and Nick Perry. As a rookie, he could serve as a rotational pass rusher along with Vince Biegel and Kyler Fackrell and then play a bigger role on defense in the future as he polishes his game.


NFL Categories: 
  • Like Like
  • 0 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (50) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

EdsLaces's picture

I just do not get the hype at all with this guy. Although he did very well for his small school I feel like to go that early in the draft he needed to absolutely dominate like Mack did, and he simply did not.

Finwiz's picture

Word I'm hearing from various scouts is Davenport isn't worthy of being taken in the 1st round, let alone at 14.
The only edge guy worthy of picking at 14 is Chubb, and he's supposed to be gone in the top 5.

WKUPackFan's picture

Some of the draft analysts current predictions for Davenport:
Bucky Brooks - #20 Detroit
Charley Casserly - #9 San Francisco
Chad Reuter - #16 Baltimore
Chris Trapasso - #15 Indianapolis (mock trade with AZ)
Jared Dubin - #20 Detroit
R.J. White - #14 Green Bay
Charlie Campbell - #18 Seattle
Daniel Jeremiah - #12 in Jeremiah's Top 50

A lot of experts are going to be wrong if Davenport is not worthy of being a 1st round pick

dobber's picture

I have to admit that I like watching 'draft gurus' huff and puff when they whiff badly.

WKUPackFan's picture

That is fun, but it seems that major whiffs have decreased over the years.

I do not understand the disdain shown by some (not you) for draft analysts. A lot of them really do watch tape, talk to the college and pro coaches, scouts, etc. Without their work we would have much less information about the draft.

In a sense their task is almost impossible, because when the inevitable draft day trades occur the draft order is shuffled, throwing off the predictions.

The TKstinator's picture

Kiper vs Tobin back in 94 was awesome.

Savage57's picture

"Who the hell is Mel Kiper?"

WKUPackFan's picture

Actually weather people are amazingly accurate these days. Check out the hourly forecasts and see how close they are to accurate. Farmers and many other industries/organizations understand and depend on the accuracy of those forecasts.

It all depends on what definition of wrong we are using. If an analyst accurately predicts most of the first round players, but misses the exact order of those picks, I would say he/she has done a good job.

Again, we have to account for the fact that draft day trades will, by definition, change the order from what the analysts predicted. Thus, all mocks will have an error factor. Teams that make seemingly illogical picks also shuffle the order. For example, most analysts did not predict that the Chargers would select Joey Bosa #3 in 2016 because San Diego had other, more pressing needs. Bosa has been an excellent player, but the logic of thinking San Diego would go another way was sound.

And there is accountability. Several sites post the actual draft results v. the analysts predictions each year.

WKUPackFan's picture

Thanks Jonathan, I appreciate your feedback as well, and have done the same for your comments. We get a lot of weather swings here in the Ohio Valley as well, 80° day last week, snowing (no accumulation) yesterday!

Finwiz's picture

No they are not.

At best they are 50/50. Just about anybody, with any degree of intelligence can look at a couple of computer models and make a prediction on weather, a couple of days out.

I know this because weather forecasts are a big part of the ground school flight training I'm going through.

When these guys get more than 36 hours out, it's a total crap shoot because they just don't know. They just want you to THINK they know.

Finwiz's picture

They routinely get it wrong. I READ the draft analysis and when I see things like, "can't hold the edge in run support", and "get's washed out on speed rushes", I think whats the difference between this guy and what we have already.

He just looks like Datone Jones to me.

We need the surest thing we can find at 14, regardless of position, besides QB and RB, but preferably on defense. This guy isn't it.

I'd trade a couple of picks for Chubb to get into the top 5, before I'd draft this guy. Even Chubb doesn't look like a sure thing, when you READ the entire draft report and look at the weaknesses.

packerfan9507's picture

I wouldn't like this pick. Draft darling.

He looks stiff, slow, and unathletic. I wouldn't even burn a second on him. Getting off blocks with hands is basic football IQ stuff. Suggests a lot of work is needed.

Peppers, contrarily, was quick and agile and had the pedigree of an elite athlete going into the draft.

"He could serve as a rotational pass rusher along with Vince Biegel and Kyler Fackrell"

I'd hope Pettine swaps in Gilbert for the latter, otherwise I'd be worried not much has changed.

Tundraboy's picture

Another year, perhaps worth a gamble. This year no.

stockholder's picture

I think you nailed it.

Tundraboy's picture

Thanks, I try.

dobber's picture

Every pick is a gamble. If you're looking for a "sure thing", you're not likely to find it at #14. If the Packer brass honestly believes that this guy is going to be a perennial All-Pro who fits their scheme and will lead this defense for years to come, then that's what we want out of that pick, isn't it? I'll take 6-8 years of high-end play even if it costs a year of getting stronger and learning on the job. Certainly the draftniks seem to be in agreement that he's a 1st round pick.

Tundraboy's picture

I dunno, just a hunch this is just too much of a gamble for our defense starved team.

dobber's picture

I understand: Davenport would be entirely a ceiling pick, and how long it would take to reach that ceiling is the question. I've warmed up to him enough that I would be OK with that pick recognizing that it would be swinging for the fences. Somehow with the level talent field, I think #14 is made for that this year.

Tundraboy's picture

Certainly will not be a dull draft this year.

kevgk's picture

I feel the hype for this guy come from the media mostly. I would be upset if they grab any player 14th overall with that poor of coverage skills. They can blitz, change fronts, and rotate the dline to maximize pass rush, but they need coverage skills be it from safties, corners, or linebackers.

dobber's picture

I've seen several comparisons between Davenport and Danielle Hunter, and they seem to test similarly although Hunter is a little better on some agility drills. Both are being knocked as needing significant development work coming out. The difference between level of competition is likely to be meaningful in how fast they develop...LSU (Hunter) vs. UTSA (Davenport). Hunter already has a 12-sack season under his belt.

The demand for pass rushers and the lack of solid talent there in the draft will lead to Davenport being overdrafted. Does that mean he won't be good? Not necessarily, but whichever team takes him will likely need to be patient. High ceiling, low floor player.

WKUPackFan's picture

Well, you know I'm going to have to defend Conference USA. To that end, the article's description of the offensive line competition Davenport faced is a little off, both for and against the conference.

UTEP is in Conference USA. They were 0-12 last season. Colorado State (Mountain West Conference) was 7-6. They were defeated by Marshall (a Conference USA member) in the New Mexico Bowl.

dobber's picture

Not intentionally disparaging C-USA per se, but most will agree it's a long way up to the SEC. Some would say it's a long way up to the SEC about the Big Ten.

WKUPackFan's picture

No problem dobber, didn't think that you were. Just getting the message out that Conference USA plays some pretty darn good football and has some excellent coaches. Unfortunately the Toppers lost one of those coaches, Jeff Brohm, to Purdue where he had a great season last year.

Tundraboy's picture

Agree. Patience is the right mindset with him. He could surprise, maybe even shock but we have an abundance of players we are patiently hoping will do just that. Like you if we get a solid 6 to 8 year player, even an immediate starter, that is what we aim for, but that is the most I will get my hopes up for. Just seems so long since we have found a star in the draft. One year we will again.

GBPDAN1's picture

I agree that 14 seems to high for Davenport. Some scouts are high on him as I've seen some project him being picked at 7-9, rd1. A lot of draft Analyst have him going anywhere between 10 and 20 1st round. I think it would be worth taking a chance in the 2nd round on him, but he won't be there. We need a playmaker at number 14 and preferably an edge pass rusher as they are the most important position next to QB.

Unfortunately, aside from Chubb, any of the remaining pass rushers are a gamble at 14. Even Landry. I'd take Landry at 20-24. The problem is that finding a edge pass rusher in FA is extremely rare as teams covet them and retain them.

Do we take a chance on Davenport or Landry in rd1? I think we shouldn't reach. So, that leaves BPA and hope for the best with what we have currently on the roster ? Our pass rush was bad last year . BG has a dilemma regarding fixing our pass rush. It almost seems that he will have to trade possibly back into the late 1st round to grab Davenport or Landry in the twenty's if they're still available? Maybe take a chance on Key if he makes it to the 2nd round? Trading up for Chubb into the top 5 is to costly. I'm stumped. How do we fix our pass rush?

dobber's picture

My gut says that Landry has the higher floor and is the safer pick.

4thand1's picture

Stock rising TY combine. The media drives this shit, he wasn't a div 1 talent for a reason. If he had 20 sacks I'd say ok, but 8? I don't think he'd make any impact his first year, he should be one that falls down the draft board on day one. Hope Ward falls to us.

WKUPackFan's picture

Conference USA is Division I.

4thand1's picture

He will be the first player ever drafted from UTSA. Neevveerr heard of it.

TheRealJHB's picture

The football program started in 2011. And he wouldn't be the 1st player from UTSA ever drafted or playing in the NFL. David Morgan (TE) was drafted by the Vikings. Teddy Williams (CB) has been in the NFL for 7 seasons, was a track star at UTSA. Jarveon Williams (RB) was with the Bengals last year. And Brian Price (OT) actually played for the Packers in 2016 before joining the Cowboys. Davenport would definitely be the most impactful player ever drafted from UTSA. It's a young program that is getting better and making strides each season.

stockholder's picture

Ward is the NO Brainer. JUst some on this site have No Brains when it comes to the draft. They still Trusted in TT. And will more then likely condemn any pick. This is America's Team. The need isn't Pass rusher. It's upgrade! The packers have age at CB now. Ward, or J Jackson will set their draft. But again Upgrade. No matter what someone says, it won't work for others. How shocking it would be if the packers took an OL. first. But thats where the need is first. Pertect A-Rod! The 2nd is WR. They should replace them all. TT failed bad here. Free agents better than starters? Please draft better!

GBPDAN1's picture

I agree , Stockholder, that we should take Ward at 14 if he's there. We need to take the BPA at 14. We need a difference makers no matter what and can not squander that pick. If not Ward, then another blue chipper. TT left this roster thin at plenty of positions, especially CB. We will fill a need at 14 no matter what.

IMO, the #1 need on this team is pass rusher. Our pass rush last year was terrible. We did not have one sack when the opponents offense was in the red zone. QBs were very comfortable against our pass D, even the bad QBs. Teams are going to score on us with no pass rush and they have been. I agree that cornerback is definitely another high priority position of need - and an important position - as we are very weak in this area.

However, I feel that a strong pass rush would help our secondary immensely. Hopefully King can make a second year leap and become a number 1 corner back. We definitely need another top cornerback out of this draft. I just don't know how we are going to fix our pass rush with a weak pass rush class in this draft. Aside from Chubb, there are no for sure candidates, especially worth choosing at number 14.

So, you are right, Ward or BPA at 14 because Chubb will be gone and the other pass rushers are question marks at 14. Sucks that we finally pick mid first round and it's during a year with a weak pass rush class.

stockholder's picture

pass Rusher. I won't complain if they take one. But who is worthy @14. Also is that person on the roster Now? Lets look at the 31st super bowl roster. Yes, White and Jones! Both were not packer draft picks! Dotson and Brown were in the middle. Butler and Robinson were tops, ( and the glue to the secondary. ) I believe if the packers want a better pass rush they need to get away from the 3 front. They could! In 2010 Raji , Pickett -FA, Jenkins. Secondary was Awesome. Still the Lbs were better than 1996. So now to the present. Is it Defense we need= Pass Rusher. @ edge ? Or better Secondary people? The answer is secondary personal. If they take Landry or Davenport their rebuilding. Clay Mathews and Raji were drafted in 2009. Rebuilding. The trench is the other most important factor. Not OLB/edge! There is no Depth in the trench. We still have Mathews! But before you take Landry; he must be better than what we have. And thats what must happen this year. Take the player better than what we have!

GBPDAN1's picture

I agree, this is a weak class for pass rushers and it's a gamble taking one at 14 compared to other difference makers that could be there when we pick. I'm not arguing that point. I'm just venting because I was hoping we'd be able to fix our pathetic pass rush this off season and I don't see how we will.

You mentioned possibly obtaining top pass rushers before the season opener by comparing years past. That was then, this is now. Teams know the high importance of a quality pass rusher in this day of passing offense. They do not let top pass rushers go. They sign them and keep them. That's why the best way to get one is in the draft. And you bring up Matthew? Matthews is not the dominant pass rusher he once was. Are you watching tape from 2010? He hasn't been the same since around the time he signed his last contract.

Our pass rush completely sucked last year!!! What has a changed? Wilkerson? I hope he helps, but 8 sacks in the last two years isn't strong evidence.

stockholder's picture

What makes you think a couple of rookies could get you more? If you look at Philly. They changed their fronts. The Reggie Whites are no more. It's up and down years for everyone. Demarcos Lawrence? He's 6'3 250. Ok show me him! Is Davenport , Lawrence? Still the time for him to develop is a question mark. He does not help A-Rod get back to the super-bowl. The Cowboys aren't that much better with Lawrence. And he was a 2nd round pick!!! Even Mikeal Strahan was a 2nd rd pick. In the long run; Davenport will be better than Landry. The packers need NFL Bodies. The OL is in a mess. - Conner Williams? Wr is a mess.- Ridley is not Beckham or Jones. Vita Vea should be the Packers pick with Edge second. @14 If You want NFL Bodies!! I would follow the packers draft of 2009. This: Get Vea first. Vander ESH 2nd. Sweat 3rd. It may take a extra pick here and there but the defense would be awesome.

TheRealJHB's picture

I like Marcus Davenport and his measurables give him a high ceiling BUT I don't want to use our 14th pick on a small school project. I still think, unless James or Fitzpatrick or Edmunds or Smith fall to us, Josh Jackson is the route to go at 14. Hell, I'd even be fine if we drafted Leighton VanderEsch or DJ Moore at 14, but not Davenport. We can find a solid edge rusher later in the draft, someone like Kemoko Turay. Or if we are set on taking a risk, we should draft Arden Key, a player who I think could contribute right away and develop into a probowl beast eventually.

Bure9620's picture

Does not know how to use his hands, he can't bend or can in the wrong places and has a high pad level. No, he's a total project, not a 1st rounder.

AgrippaLII's picture

He's a draft and develop talent. No way the Packer's take him at #14.

Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

Tough to say with the small school coaching this kid received. Great potential if he takes to pro coaching, and almost certainly a run-stuffing machine outside. But pass-rushing takes moves and bend--neither of which he has right now.

Pure talent? Top 10, easily. But the risk factor feels too high for #14, unless the Packer coaches feel they can mold him.

If we take him, it says a lot about the confidence of Pettine and his crew.

Nononsense's picture

I look at Davenport from a different perspective. I see a guy that is ready to break out. For 4 years hes gotten better every year as hes slowly gained muscle and grown into his 6'6" frame and he still has room for more. Most of his weaknesses are coachable with the exception of flexibility but even that he can work on.

He might not put up 12 sacks this year for us because he wont get to start or play a large majority of the snaps. If he does I wouldnt be the least bit surprised to see him racking up double digit sacks in 2018 and beyond.

I would also be ok with Landry at 14 because I see a lot of potential in that guy as well. If those guys are the floor for 14, thats a pretty decent looking floor in my mind. Vea, Ward, Edmunds, Jackson wouldnt upset me either.

BTW, Arden Key who I like as well in the 2nd kinda reminds me a little of Aldon Smith good and bad...

stockholder's picture

Then what you like is rebuilding. Potential.? yes. Break out . yes. But while we wait for it. A-rods window is closing. And if they don't get Adams money, they'll move on. Compare your draft crush to a all-pro or legend. Kevin Greene?

dobber's picture

So, if an edge player they like and feel is a strong player on their board (who will also mitigate the likely loss of CMIII after 2018) is available at #14, they shouldn't take him because they should reach for some other player...and something about Adams money...wait, Kevin Greene is available? I'm confused.

stockholder's picture

seems your always confused. You must wear a Question Mark on your cap. If that edge player is their player. Take him. The band aid worked for TT until he was replaced.

dobber's picture

In our conversations, yes, I very frequently wear the question mark hat.

But if you can clarify for me what TT did and how that matters in 2018, I'd be glad to hear it. If BG bypasses a player he thinks is best for the Packers--at any position--because he's worried that it will create some kind of negative link to TTs legacy, then he won't be for long in GB.

Chuck Farley's picture

In any other draft, he's a round 2 or early 3rd.
I don't see a fit here. Can't cover, poor lat. speed, has no pass rush move. This is the NFL not div 1a where he didn't dominate.
Could be a one pick for a team deep in talent.

Nononsense's picture

Heres a nice breakdown of Davenport from retired NFL DL Stephen White from SB Nation.

Its just one guys opinion but I definitely share the same feelings about Davenport as he does. Just based off of what I could see by watching his highlights and individual game videos.

Would not be shocked to see him go before 14 with the value placed on pass rushers in the draft. I dont care about any other draft, for me this year Davenport is worthy of the 14th overall pick. Be better if we could trade down and still get him but he wont make it past 20 IMO.

2nd round offers some good CBs to potentially choose from, Mike Hughes, Carlton Davis, Isaiah Oliver, Donte Jackson, and maybe some round 1 fallers like Jaire Alexander or Josh Jackson but doubtful.

Chuck Farley's picture

If Gutt takes this guy, I want Ted back and I really do not want Ted back. The team is a shambles due to Ted's picks and the guys he let go.

stockholder's picture

I don't think you have to worry. Gute would set his Draft by taking J. Jackson cb first. The biggest mistake will be taking a CB second rd. Davenport won't be bad. If the guy ever adds 25 pound of muscle. They have the DE of the future. Davenport isn't a one trick pony. With the right DL coach he should be very good. Just we may have wait. Much like N. Perry. And that is his problem. Waiting! Thats why most prefer someone else.

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook

Pre-Order The Pro Football Draft Preview Today!!


Player Profiles



"The Bears still suck!"
"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "
"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."