Packers Draft Special: When are the Good Players Drafted Re-Check

I did my best last offseason to try and figure out where the best players at each position were drafted.  The point, obviously, was to figure out which position needed to be targeted early, and at which spots you could find guys that could play later on.  All of that research can be found here.

It's as important to check your work as it is to create as big a sample size as possible.  So what we're going to do here today is find out how much last year's research holds up.  I'm going to use the exact same research formula.  We're going to take the top 20% of qualified players in Pro Football Focus' grades and find out when they were drafted.  We'll use that information to create an Average Round Score.  

Then the real fun part arrives and we'll get a chance to compare to last year's results.

Here is the 2019 homework part (link):

Here are you 2018 results: 

Position Average Round Score
Quarterbacks (6 players) 2.00
Running Backs (14 players) 2.63
Wide Receivers (23 players) 2.17
Tight Ends (14 players) 3.93
Tackles (16 players) 3.93
Interior Offensive Linemen (15 OG and 7C) 3.36
Cornerback (24 players) 3.67
Safety (17 players) 3.53
Off Ball Linebacker (19 players, tie at 18) 3.28
Defensive Interior (24 players) 3.08
Edge Rusher (21 players) 1.67

and the 2019 results

Position Average Round SCore
Quarterbacks (8 players) 2.00
Running Backs (12 players) 3.67
Wide Receivers (23 players) 2.70
Tight Ends (14 players) 2.71
Tackles (16 players)  2.00
Interior Offensive Linemen 16 OG and 8C) 3.54
Defensive Interior (22 players) 3.45
Edge Rusher (20 players)  1.95
Linebackers (18 players)  2.83
Cornerbacks (22 candidates) 3.27
Safeties (19 candidates)  2.58

which ultimately leads to what we're actually looking for, the results: 

2018 ranks

EDGE
QB
WR
RB
DI
LB
IOL
S
CB
TE (tie)
OT (tie)

2019 ranks

EDGE
QB (tie)
OT (tie)
S
WR
TE
LB
CB
DI
IOL
RB

So what did we actually learn?

Justis Mosqueda is dead-ass right.  Quarterbacks are indeed pass rushers.  Through two seasons, no two positions have correlated more closely with their draft position than quarterback and edge rusher.  Do good ones come late in the draft or after the draft? Sure.  But Tom Brady and Cam Wake are truly outliers.  Aaron Rodgers and Von Miller are a much more accurate representation.

Even though cornerback is a premier position, The NFL has found a way to find good ones late.  You can view it that way or you can come to the conclusion that the NFL isn't particularly good at identifying what makes a good cornerback.  Either way they've showed up late on the list twice.  

Safeties show up higher than you'd think.  

Ultimately, though, It really looks like we need another year of data becuase there's definitely volatility towards the end and in the middle.  I'm excited to re-check again in 2020.

-------------------

Ross Uglem is a staff writer for Cheesehead TV. He can be found on Twitter @RossUglem 

NFL Categories: 
4 points

Comments (45)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
Mojo's picture

March 29, 2019 at 02:24 pm

So Brian Burns or Sweat it is.

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
NitschkeFan's picture

March 29, 2019 at 02:36 pm

Very nice work Ross. I wish there was more data (more years).

Also it might be worthwhile finding out the average draft position of each position (all players, not just the best). It may reveal that a disproportionate amount of QB’s and Edge players are taken in rounds 1-2.

Might help illuminate any statistical significance or lack there of.

+ REPLY
9 points
9
0
Cubbygold's picture

March 29, 2019 at 02:48 pm

Said it last year and I'll say it again, your analysis is incomplete, leading to false conclusions.

Elite QBs are more valuable than TEs. As a result, more QBs are taken in early rounds, and teams wait to pick TEs.

Look at TEs last year by round:
First - 1
Second - 2
Third - 2
Fourth - 5

Look at QBs last year by round:
First - 5
Second - 0
Third - 1
Fourth - 1

We should expect good QBs to be found early in the draft and good TEs to be found in later rounds, its a self-fulfilling prophecy.

A more interesting analysis would give the probability of finding a top player by position based on the number of picks used per round on the position. This would tell you whether GMs are good at finding elite talent in those rounds.

+ REPLY
6 points
11
5
Ross Uglem's picture

March 29, 2019 at 03:16 pm

Your'e definitely wrong, but if you're not, then do it. Nothing is stopping you from formatting that analysis outside of your own laziness. Much easier to just point fingers at those who do the work.

The numbers are whatever you need the numbers to be. Cornerbacks have a very high rate of being drafted in the first two rounds, they're near the bottom. The same goes for offensive tackles in 2018's data.

There would be just as many holes in your analysis (which doesn't exist) as there are in mine. What is really needed is a broader database with more years, which I don't have the time to do.

Most find this a useful tool, if you want to do your own (also flawed) numbers go right ahead.

+ REPLY
4 points
15
11
NitschkeFan's picture

March 29, 2019 at 04:19 pm

Just for readers that are interested in this type of data analysis there was an article a few years ago where the author looked at players performance through the first 5 years of their career and compared it to their draft position.

www dot footballperspective.com / creating-a-nfl-draft-value-chart-part-i/

+ REPLY
6 points
6
0
Cubbygold's picture

March 30, 2019 at 06:23 pm

No need to call me lazy Ross. Good luck

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
kevgk's picture

March 29, 2019 at 06:04 pm

I don't understand the issue. Yes youre right that round selection per player is not independent random variables because of the zero sum nature of the draft, BUT this information is data about the success of where NFL teams draft players, which is needed to predict what NFL teams will do in the draft. This isn't about where players objectively belong, its just where teams tend to draft players.

+ REPLY
9 points
9
0
Cubbygold's picture

March 30, 2019 at 06:23 pm

If a team used logic as simple as this they'd pass on drafting a TE in the first two rounds this year because "they can find good TEs in later rounds". We know thats an oversimplification of reality and that every draft is different. If you want elite TE production, youve got to use top picks this year because the talent pool is different. Ross' analysis isn't wrong, its just not very insightful.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
porupack's picture

March 30, 2019 at 01:48 am

Cubbygold,
no computation tells you everything, and you need multiple analytics.
Ross's is very insightful, to tell you where a GM needs to target, and it takes into account things you mention; i.e., positional value. So, sure, QBs are value highly. Sure, they and pass rushers are self fulfilling, in that GMs are competing with 31 others if they want QB or OLB. So, Ross shows where you will have to target if you want your law of averages to work for you to get a top 20 PFF performer.

Excellent work Ross. Very appreciated, as I'm definitely a lazy stat cruncher.

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
Handsback's picture

March 29, 2019 at 03:15 pm

I think the data is a little skewed, but just got back from Costa Rica vacation so I'm not thinking exactly right yet. So if a first round QB is successful and an edge rusher goes in the first round and both are successful is it because they went in the first round, or because they were good and were selected in the first round. An example, Quentin Nelson, a guard, goes in the 1st round and is successful. A third round guard starts, but not All-Pro. So the best round to pick up a guard is the first round? Or the average round good guards go is the 2nd?
I actually think that each team has a trend and enough research, you will find it and have success determining their picks.

Most horizontal draft boards have individual players ranked per first through 7th rounds. Even priority FAs have a slot. What this year's draft is concluding is there are NO, I repeat NO top 5 draft prospects. There will be players picked in the top 5 slots, but at this time they aren't top 5 talents.
Here are the top 2 guys and they are rated just below the top 5 slots:
1.Bosa
2.Williams
Mid to late 1st round guys:
3.Allen
4.Oliver
5.Ferrell
6.Wilkins
7.White
8.Simmons
9.Williams
10.Hockenson

Those are your top ten players. Figure two maybe three QBs will be selected before 12, and one of those top ten guys will fall to the Packers. The next three positions are:
11.Gary
12.Murphy
13.Jacobs

So one of the top ten or one of the next 3. Those are your draft possibilities. If you knew how Gutsy drafted, or what players MLF wants...you could probably figure who will be selected with that 12th pick.

+ REPLY
6 points
7
1
Bert's picture

March 29, 2019 at 05:15 pm

Handsback. That's a well thought out post. Be interesting to see who we get at #12 but you may be on to something with your analysis. Like you, I think a couple QBs will be taken prior to #12 which probably leaves us with a couple of your #3-10 guys. Nice work.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
4thand1's picture

March 29, 2019 at 05:45 pm

The best would 3 QB's taken before the Pack picks. There will be teams behind GB trying to move up to get a QB.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
kevgk's picture

March 29, 2019 at 06:08 pm

Finding the average round drafter per good player is just an average. It doesn't tell us the shape or variance of the distribution, but it is still important for compariason. youre right the distribution will have a skew though.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
porupack's picture

March 30, 2019 at 01:56 am

True, but if you're a GM and trying to build your draft board and have 3 players that you judge of near equal talent, athleticism and value to your team, then Ross's average will tell you which one to prioritize....based on average. That's pretty handy piece of knowledge....and we all know, that its just a predictor with statistical variances, let alone all the human judgements a GM has to make, and a GM can override the math as he might choose. We get that.
Still, the average round to get a top 20% PFF performer is a good tool.

+ REPLY
1 points
3
2
porupack's picture

March 30, 2019 at 02:10 am

Handsback;
I'm pretty sure that no one is successful just because they were picked in a particular round. We wouldn't have to go back very far to find a lot of busts in round one. There is an astounding amount of speculation that goes into draft boards, and mocks, and that seems how players get ranked, and prioritized.
As for your example of a OG; 1st vs 3rd, then you average and come up with 2nd;
I don't think you use the results to conclude; always go for an OG in second round. It does however allow you to compare against other positions, and tells you where to rank priority 2 players if you want to maximize the draft. Ross has a good tool.

Vacations are good for a few lapses, you'll get back in the groove:).

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
Dzehren's picture

March 30, 2019 at 11:14 am

It’s intereting no offensive lineman listed.
So if none are taken would GUTE select the first OT off the board? Based on Oliver’s pro day yesterday - he probably won’t fall to 12. Keep an eye on Wilkins Sweat (has official visit with GB this week),Ferrell or the Devin’s.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Swisch's picture

March 29, 2019 at 03:17 pm

All the analysis is good and fun and important and intriguing.
Then you have to make a human decision as GM about another human as a draft pick.
If at #12 there is a choice between Burns and Oliver and Hock, you gotta go with the human factor.
Which guy do you most wanna go with into the fray for the next several seasons?
There are no guarantees -- things happen. But at least you win or lose with your guys, so no real regrets.

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
MarkinMadison's picture

March 29, 2019 at 03:18 pm

I guess to say how good or bad the NFL is at judging talent at a position you'd have to look at the whole pool and see the average round drafted for each position. The over/under would indicate that the NFL is relatively good or bad at evaluating a particular position, or at least not reaching for a particular position. Example: not many interior offensive linemen are taken in the first round, so you have to factor that in if you are going to use these numbers to determine how accurate teams' assessments are of a particular position.

Some positions it is also really hard to judge who the top 20% really are - this might somewhat account for the big swing in OTs between the two years.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
jannes bjornson's picture

March 29, 2019 at 04:48 pm

You also have the error factor of max performance given longevity.
Did this guy hit his high mark in College Ball or will he continue to improve
physically as well as mentally as he gains reps in the Pro Game.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Archie's picture

March 29, 2019 at 06:38 pm

Might make more sense to look at bust ratio by position and round.

3 Guards in R2 and 1 = bust, BR (bust ratio) = 1/3 = 33%.

Then you compare bust ratios across each position round by round.

Example: R1 - overall bust ratio = 30%

BR....QB R1 = 25%, R2 = 40%, R3 = 60%
BR ...WR R1 = 50%, R2 = 35%, R3 = 35%

How you define a bust may differ between R1-3, R4-5 and R6-7.

This type of analysis would tell you when the odds were on your side but what self-respecting GM would let this type of analysis overrule their gut feeling as to who to pick. Maybe it would be worth considering as a tie-breaker e.g., you like 3 guys equally in R1 and one is a WR and the numbers show WR has the highest R1 bust rate 3 years running and 4 of last 5 years.

+ REPLY
4 points
4
0
jannes bjornson's picture

March 29, 2019 at 07:24 pm

That would work with the sampling eliminating any debilitating injury affecting result.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Coldworld's picture

March 30, 2019 at 07:26 am

The first round bust ratio of 30% is a powerful indicator of the amount of unempirical guesswork that goes into rankings and also probably indicates that factors other than BPA are at play as well as willingness to take a risk in high upside assessments.

Overall I agree with the point that league concepts of positional value and expectations of demand for positions play heavily into where players are expected to go. For example I’ve the last couple of decades, the ILB position has largely slipped as has RB. I would suspect that this would be reflected in average position of such players. It’s nit that the players got worse, but that the perceived value of the position changed.

Overall though, there is no simple formula. Both the piece and comments contain interesting insights but equally neither is a complete explanation. Finally, there are always the irrational or incompetent actors (late Al Davis and Millen era Lions being examples) where serial missteps further cloud the picture. Evaluation is after all a judgement call in the end.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
ShooterMcGee's picture

March 29, 2019 at 03:56 pm

I am surprised that rb and wr are so high. It always seems that good ones are found in later rounds or even UDFA like that cat from Denver.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
Since'61's picture

March 29, 2019 at 04:08 pm

Ross - I think at this point you have data but not yet enough for it to provide information. A few more seasons will be helpful. While I would expect that QBs and Edge are usually found at the top of the draft other positions may depend on where the value is in a particular year.

One year the draft may be a good season for CBs, the next year’s draft may be strong for WRs, and so on. Therefore it will take at least a few more seasons to develop a comprehensive view for each position.

However, I appreciate the concept and your effort to bring the information to us. Thanks, Since ‘61

+ REPLY
6 points
6
0
ILPackerBacker's picture

March 29, 2019 at 04:26 pm

Not many interior OL are taken high becuase it is relatively easy to train one up who was taken lower.

The value of the position is key. Does anyone trade a brady or rodgers for a couple of guards?

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
dobber's picture

March 29, 2019 at 04:43 pm

I think that for some positions, the correlation between athleticism and draft position is important. I think you can have really good NT, DT, G and C who are not very good athletes, but you have proportionately fewer players at edge and other positions who are good but not good athletes (which raises the demand for athletic traits and inflates values for those players).

+ REPLY
5 points
5
0
Coldworld's picture

March 30, 2019 at 07:28 am

By which I believe you imply that some positions have a much more limited pool of individuals to choose from thus exaggerating value and hence position? That is a good point if so.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Leatherhead's picture

March 29, 2019 at 04:38 pm

You carry two QBs and 5 edge guys.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Jonathan Spader's picture

March 29, 2019 at 06:25 pm

6 QBs seems excessive Jannes ~~~~~~~

For the 5 Packer EDGE guys 2 Smiths, Gilbert, Fackrell, draft pick. For the 6th it'll depend on who emerges and if they keep Kizer and Boyle on the 53 or stash Boyle on the PS depending on the preseason performances. Kizer isn't a lock for the 53 based off of 2018.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
jannes bjornson's picture

March 29, 2019 at 07:30 pm

If the depth for edge in this draft is true as some assume, take two. Za Smith could go 5 tech with a speed guy on the edge and Preston Smith holding the strong side. We'll wait out Fackerell to see if he show up for a contract year. I maybe overlooking Donnerson in the count but you need six Edge guys for your defense. Maybe getting greedy here. Pettine may want Oliver or Wilkens to keep the DT rotation robust.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
jannes bjornson's picture

March 29, 2019 at 07:33 pm

If Grier was there at three I would draft him or Stidhem. I have zero faith in Kizer and Boyle is a project with a long learning curve and little escapability.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
Packer_Fan's picture

March 29, 2019 at 06:11 pm

QB and Edge are two of the most impactful positions, so yeah, they get drafted earlier and that drives the lower numbers. But it shows that later rounds teams can find great players. ie: Bahktiari. I think it is best if Gute can hit it good with the picks. If Gute gets it right on two thirds of the first four rounds and then maybe a couple of good picks in round 5 through 7. If that happens, then Gute hits a home run. Just don't hope another 2016 draft occurs. That doomed Thompson as his formula worked only if he was successful.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Archie's picture

March 29, 2019 at 06:41 pm

Once Thompson lost Dorsey he came apart at the seams.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Archie's picture

March 29, 2019 at 06:50 pm

Another way of looking at this would be calculate the average draft value for each position for all starters on game 3 (use pick used rather than round).

Average draft position of 32 QB starters = 38
Average draft position of 32 TE starters = 76
Average draft position of 64 WR starters = 52
Average draft position of 64 OT starters = 61

The problem with this analysis is interpreting why a number is high. Is it high because there lots high pick drafts or because teams value these positions less and draft for them more heavily after the premium rounds. That's why I like the bust rate approach better. It tells you where and when the risk is relatively high.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Archie's picture

March 29, 2019 at 06:52 pm

Is it high because there lots high pick drafts [at this position are busts] or because .....

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
albert999's picture

March 29, 2019 at 10:10 pm

overkill Archie

+ REPLY
-2 points
0
2
marpag1's picture

March 30, 2019 at 05:12 am

OK, I won't argue. But I think I'll still pop in the game tape and make my decisions that way.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
NMPF's picture

March 30, 2019 at 07:52 am

All the nerd analytics and such are very cool and interesting, BOTTOM LINE-IF YOU CAN'T JUDGE TALENT THIS IS ALL BS. Fun BS but BS nonetheless.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
Archie's picture

March 30, 2019 at 10:43 am

Agreed, there are those who have a consistent eye for young talent and everybody else. Apparently John Dorsey has it. Jury is still out on Gutey but I'm hopeful. His first FA class wasn't so good but his 2nd one looks very good on paper. His first draft was amazingly aggressive in R1 and it worked. R2 and R3 await further information. Rest of draft wasn't bad. I liked that he found athletic/size/speed freaks who were also football players. If he aces his 2nd draft and gets development from Jackson and Burks, happy days are back. I'll be holding out for Ed Oliver on draft day but will gladly take Hock as a consolation prize. AROD could use a star TE. And he would add to the Pack's run game.

Here's an interesting question - now that Philly has traded for Howard, what if Josh Jacobs is there at 30 - do we take him as BPA? Jacobs and Hock would really spice things up for LaFleur's new offense. Come back with Lindstrom at 44? If I can't have Oliver, I'd certainly be happy with these three picks.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
Minniman's picture

March 30, 2019 at 03:51 pm

Ross, it's a noble endeavor but I'm not sure that you would be able to achieve your goal by purely looking at draft position and player ranking once in the NFL.

There are additional factors to go into this algorithm to make it more accurate and these would be:

1) Relative positional draft strength (perhaps including a draftee score and round projection) : Is this a strong or weak draft class for that position? Did someone go higher than expected? How does this positional draft class stack up against previous year's classes for depth?

2) Team need: Are needy teams going to draft for need over BPA

3) Player fit: Is the draftee "the right tool for the right job" or is a team trying to use a draftee differently to their college history (e.g. a strict 3 technique 4-3 DE as a 3-4 OLB)

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Minniman's picture

March 30, 2019 at 11:33 am

As an addit, some other musings are:

1) NFL analysts have made the point that there seems to be a tendency to draft the expensive positions using early picks and buying the cheaper positions via FA. Sure, there's a correlation between the importance of the position and price paid, but this can cause reaches by needy teams.

2) With the Roughing The Passer rule changes will Edge rusher become slightly devalued as teams aim to attack the QB equally inside and out (and with Secondary blitzes) to pressure for an early or inaccurate release - as opposed to scheming to get one "missile" free to take out the QB with an old-fashioned violent sack.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 30, 2019 at 04:21 pm

Looking at the PFF top 8, the mode is 1st round. The mode is also the number one overall pick.

The median is 17th pick and First round. The average due to Brady (199th pick - 6th round Comp) is the 43rd pick.

I note that 25 of the top 32 QBs per PFF were first round picks, with most of them having been selected in the top 12 (that's from memory). Luck, Goff, Mayfield, Ryan, Wentz, Mariota, Newton, Winston, Smith, Allen, Darnold, Trubisky, and Rosen were all top 5 picks. A couple of 2nd rounders, one third (Wilson), one fourth (Cousins), one sixth (Brady), and Keenum was a UDFA.

I would conclude that franchise QBs generally are found in the first round, and usually the top half.

Using just passer rating, the mode was first round and pick number 7 overall. The average was pick 17. Passer Rating excludes Brady/AR and added Luck and Winston instead. Same conclusion.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Stickwin's picture

April 22, 2019 at 09:32 pm

Thanks for your research and kudos to you as a writer for inspiring me to take a deeper look into the topic. For starters, here's a chart of your data for the past two years - I find this presentation of the data to be more revealing:

2018 Draft Position of the Top 20%
Position R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 UDFA Total
------------ ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- -------- --------
QB 5 1 1 1 8
RB 4 2 4 3 1 14
WR 5 5 1 2 1 2 16
TE 2 5 1 1 2 3 14
T 9 1 2 1 1 2 16
IDL 6 4 4 3 2 3 22

DL 7 5 4 3 3 2 24
EDGE 14 4 1 2 21
ILB 3 7 2 3 2 1 1 19
CB 11 3 1 1 1 7 24
S 4 3 2 2 3 1 1 1 17

2019 Draft Position of the Top 20%
Position R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 UDFA Total
------------ ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- -------- --------
QB 5 1 1 1 8
RB 3 2 3 1 1 2 12
WR 8 5 6 2 2 23
TE 2 3 4 2 2 13
T 9 4 1 1 1 16
IOL 6 4 4 3 2 1 3 24

DL 6 5 3 2 1 2 3 22
EDGE 10 5 3 1 1 20
ILB 2 6 1 2 3 1 16
CB 11 3 1 1 1 5 22
S 8 4 2 1 3 1 19

I agree that more data is needed before we jump to conclusions. I look forward to producing more of these charts - looking back more years for trends. I also want to see what the charts look like for the top half of the league's starters - how many late round picks make it to solid starter status.

I used a similar process to chart some draft rankings last year and it led to some interesting conclusions (including drafting 3 WR's).

One final note about your data - I found two numbers that used wrong counts. Your 2019 data sheet listed 15 LBs but your stated count was 18. The number of TEs listed was 13, not 14. It appears these will change some of your data points.

Thanks again Ross.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Stickwin's picture

April 22, 2019 at 09:59 pm

unfortunately the charts didn't show correct spacing.

2018 Draft Position of the Top 20%
Position...R1...R2...R3....R4....R5....R6....R7...UDFA...Total
QB.............5.....1......1.......................1..............................8
RB.............4......2......4...............3...........................1.......14
WR............5......5......1...............2......1...................2.......16
TE..............2.....5.......1......1...............2..................3.......14
T................9......1...............2......1................1.........2......16
IDL............6......4.......4......3...............2..................3......22

DL.............7..... 5...... 4...... 3.... 3........................... 2.... 24
EDGE..... 14..... 4...... 1...... 2.......................................... 21
ILB........... 3..... 7....... 2...... 3..... 2..... 1.................. 1.... 19
CB.......... 11...... 3..... 1........................ 1..... 1......... 7.... 24
S.............. 4....... 3..... 2...... 2...... 3...... 1..... 1......... 1.... 17

2019 Draft Position of the Top 20%
Position...R1...R2...R3....R4....R5....R6....R7...UDFA...Total
QB.............5.....1......1.......................1..............................8
RB.............3......2......3...............1...............1.........2.......12
WR............8......5......6...............2..........................2.......23
TE..............2.....3.......4......2.......2..........................3.......13
T................9......4.......1......1...................................1......16
IDL............6......4.......5......2.......1.......2......1.........3......24

DL.............6..... 5...... 3...... 2.... 1.................2........ 3..... 24
EDGE..... 10..... 5...... 3...... 1...................................1...... 20
ILB........... 2...... 6...... 1...... 2..... 3......................... 1...... 15
CB.......... 11...... 3............... 1..... 1......1................. 5...... 22
S.............. 8........4...... 2...... 1......3......................... 1...... 19

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0

Log in to comment 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.