Myles Jack

UCLA
Linebacker #30
6’1″ 245

UCLA linebacker Myles Jack runs during the second half of an NCAA college football game against Memphis, Saturday, Sept. 6, 2014, in Pasadena, Calif. UCLA won 42-35. (AP Photo/Mark J. Terrill) ** Usable by LA, DC, CGT and CCT Only **

Myles Jack is very, very good.

Good:
– Take on ability, deliver the contact instead of taking the contact
– Block shedding
– Play strength
– Play recognition, situational understanding, pursuit
– Tackling
– Zone match coverage, man coverage vs RBs and TEs with some ability to cover slot WRs, smooth hips
– Speed, quickness, agility, explosive
– Blitzing
– Defeating cut blocks

Bad:
– Coming off meniscus injury and not yet 100%
– Stat production on TFLs and sacks
– At times wont break down in space and over runs

Notes:
– Played mostly man coverage
– Wasn’t asked to rush the passer from the edge position
– Where will a team choose to play him?

Myles Jack is one of the best linebacker prospect I’ve seen coming out of college. At the very least, he’s unquestionably the one of the most complete linebacker I’ve ever seen coming out. I have no clue how someone can watch his tape and complain about anything he does. After watching him I’m as giddy as a junior high kid that just asked out his crush. But at the same time, Jack might make me the most nervous I’ve ever been about a player because of how confident I am that he’s going to be top 5 at his position sooner rather than later. He’s probably the best cover linebacker in the class and is also a very good in box run defender. Although he wasn’t asked to rush off the edge much and didn’t have much sack production, the times he did showed me the burst and athleticism to develop as a rusher in the future.

Something that has caused many to sour on Jack is the overstating of his versatility. Everything using his past as a running back and following receivers has caused people’s vision to blur on what he’s actually going to be asked to do at the next level. Although he fared well when asked to man up against Nelson Agholor, among others, he will not be asked to cover a team’s number one receiver in the NFL. What it does show is that he should be plenty comfortable matching on backs and tight ends. Another criticism is the lack of sacks and tackles for loss. Production is a factor to consider, but Jack’s role wasn’t always typical for a linebacker. With most linebackers playing zone or a form of match zone based on the lack of man to man cover ability, Jack and UCLA played more man than anything else in the games I saw. This means that his back would be turned to the back field in order to run with his man. And while Jack and fellow linebacker prospect Darron Lee would many times start plays lined up in similar positions, Lee was asked to play mostly zone so his eyes are always in the back field allowing him to see and react to plays behind the line. Lee was also asked to blitz off the edge more which many times leaves you unaccounted for and unblocked in run schemes. Not taking anything away from Lee, just using him as an example that there are other explanations for production or lack of production other than ability.

Although he was only able to play a few games in 2015, I believe he showed a great deal of improvement in his ability to play in the box. Earlier in his career he played a lot more in space and coverage. He was schemed to match up versus wide receivers more than most, which he was also asked to do in 2015 versus BYU. In the NFL his ideal spot would be at the off ball linebacker position. Many formations will call for two linebacker sets so defining a player as inside or outside really only tells me whether they are a two down or three down player. Unless they are referring to the inside or outside with relation to the wide side of the field in two linebacker sets assuming teams always flip them, then okay, but I doubt many if any mean that when referring to the positional differentiation. I think the only thing that will derailed Jack’s career could be further injury/not ever fully recovering, or teams trying to get too cute with the things they ask him to do resulting in him not being the impact player you would hope for in the top 10.

Round Value:

1st – Top 10

Games watched: Virginia 2015, BYU 2015, UNLV 2015, USC 2014, Kansas St 2014, Virginia 2014

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*