- Joined
- Mar 21, 2011
- Messages
- 40,636
- Reaction score
- 47,093
I'm in search of a grading system that works for me as I start to evaluate the 2026 prospects - I've never used a grading system in the past but just based my evaluations on 'feel' or instinct but as I'm starting much earlier this time around, I wanted to be more organised and analytical.
What does this have to do with Craig Woodson you ask? I thought it would be useful to see how these different grading systems apply to real world examples and Woodson was probably our most controversial pick last draft outside of Will Campbell. Whilst I don't think there was anyone who thought Woodson was an egregious pick, there were certainly those who felt he was overrdrafted.
So what do the grading systems say?
Here's one I found, admittedly only on Reddit, but I like it's detail.
Here's what it says about 4th round selections:
Even if you think Woodson is no more than a backup, if you consider his football character/intelligence as a developmental trait which I think it's clear Vrabel did, then even the most pessimistic assessment of Woodson as a mere backup justifies his 4th round pick.
Here's a second, more open, grading system.
This one relies more on numerical grading, a system that doesn't really work for me personally (how do you decide whether someone grades as a 5.1 or a 5.2?).
As far as its relevance to Woodson goes, it considers someone who "has a chance to make and contribute" worthy of a grade 5.5 - 5.9. Those at the lower end of that scale are 4th rounders, those at the higher end, 3rd rounders. As pre-season has demonstrated, Woodson clearly falls in the "make and contribute" category. Again, I'd say that this justifies the Woodson pick.
I like the first Reddit grading system and I think it will be the one I use this year although I will continue to search. If you have one you'd like to share, please do, I'd be very interested in seeing it.
What does this have to do with Craig Woodson you ask? I thought it would be useful to see how these different grading systems apply to real world examples and Woodson was probably our most controversial pick last draft outside of Will Campbell. Whilst I don't think there was anyone who thought Woodson was an egregious pick, there were certainly those who felt he was overrdrafted.
So what do the grading systems say?
Here's one I found, admittedly only on Reddit, but I like it's detail.
Here's what it says about 4th round selections:
Even if you think Woodson is no more than a backup, if you consider his football character/intelligence as a developmental trait which I think it's clear Vrabel did, then even the most pessimistic assessment of Woodson as a mere backup justifies his 4th round pick.
Here's a second, more open, grading system.
College Draft Grading Scale - Chris Landry Football
Every organization has a grading system that they use similar to the one here. In fact several of the teams that I consult for use this exact system that I have used for over 20 years with a few adjustments along the way. Each player is evaluated in every category according to critical factors and
landryfootball.com
This one relies more on numerical grading, a system that doesn't really work for me personally (how do you decide whether someone grades as a 5.1 or a 5.2?).
As far as its relevance to Woodson goes, it considers someone who "has a chance to make and contribute" worthy of a grade 5.5 - 5.9. Those at the lower end of that scale are 4th rounders, those at the higher end, 3rd rounders. As pre-season has demonstrated, Woodson clearly falls in the "make and contribute" category. Again, I'd say that this justifies the Woodson pick.
I like the first Reddit grading system and I think it will be the one I use this year although I will continue to search. If you have one you'd like to share, please do, I'd be very interested in seeing it.
