I brag a little, but I’ll take our group of NFL draft analysts (Chris Pflum, Nick Falato, Mark Schofield, Joe DeLeone and Emory Hunt, video game contributor from Football Gameplan) to heart against virtually anyone who is not at NFL.com or ESPN do not work. .
We have the excellent depth prospects of Chris, the podcasts of Chris, Joe and Nick, other features and analysis of Nick, the insights of Mark about quarterback play and a bunch of other things, and Emory’s video interruptions on our YouTube -channel. Oh yes, and some contributions to the concept coverage of you.
Over the next few weeks in the run-up to the draft, I want to leverage the talent we have here at Big Blue View by posting weekly ’round table’ discussion questions.
Our first question involves a comparison of Alabama wide receiver Jaylen Waddle and Purdue wide receiver Rondale Moore.
The question:
The highly respected concept analyst Tony Pauline [Pro Football Network] recently wrote that some draft analysts, including Pauline, and more importantly some NFL talent judges, think Purdue’s Rurdale Moore receiver is a better NFL prospect than Alabama’s Jaylen Waddle. Do you agree or disagree with the sentiment? Given his injury history, how early in the draft would you be comfortable choosing Moore?
Chris Pflum
Rondale Moore is a better prospect than Jaylen Waddle? Is Tony dazed and confused? Did he indulge in that sweet leaf? I have a lot of love for Moore, but his injury history makes Waddle look like an iron man. And … Okay, okay. That’s enough to please Tony and his famous love of classic rock (namely Led Zeppelin and Black Sabbath.). On the question: Jaylen Waddle vs Rondale Moore.
Moore could be an electric playmaker in the NFL. His agility, stop / start speed, explosiveness and speed make him a problem for almost any defender. Moore can turn a little daylight into a piece of garden and change a game when he touches the ball. But so can Waddle, and the differences in how they got that touch are to me the difference in the players. Waddle is an overall player for Alabama, playing as a runner, in the short and intermediate areas, and as a vertical receiver. I noticed a bit of underrated subtlety in Waddle’s play as a receiver, playing with his routes to maximize the separation or speed through his breaks, as well as to track, locate and adjust the ball. It is also noteworthy that Waddle is a good blocker, and not just for a smaller receiver. There have been several instances where Najee Harris and DeVonta Smith have both run behind Waddle’s blocks for a beautiful garden. I have not seen Moore play nearly as much ‘receiver’. Purdue went to great lengths to create touches and spaces in which Moore could work – they are not dumb – many of whom were on the jet as a runner. But even most of his reception comes within 3 yards of the line from scratch. Similarly, I did not see the same positional skills in Moore’s play as in Waddle’s. Moore seemed happy for defenders’ outside athlete, and apparently did not track down, track and adjust the ball either.
Of course, I have to issue my standard terms: I do not have the contacts or league insight that people like Tony Pauline have. If they move Moore up and Waddle, they probably have a legitimate reason. Perhaps there are questions as to why Waddle did not take on a greater role in the offense (and answers beyond Alabama’s embarrassment of wealth). Moore’s injury history is certainly worrying, but it’s straightforward as well. A hamstring injury, finger surgery, an unspecified “lower body” injury have all conspired to limit Moore to just 4 and 3 games over the past two seasons. But injuries are easier to understand and rationalize compared to possible questions about intangible things.
Within my constraints, I have to evaluate Waddle as the best prospect. Moore has the potential to be a star in the NFL, and I will not have a problem choosing a team in the second half of the first round, but it will have to be in the right situation with the right offensive maximizes his skill. But his history of injuries makes him a bigger prospect for me. How useful is a player if you can not count on him for the (overwhelming) majority of the season? That uncertainty would have to lower my grade by a full round to something like a late second or early third round. Missing out on a second- or third-round pick hurts, but not nearly as much as losing a (possibly high) first-round pick.
Mark Schofield
Jaylen Waddle is an impressive threat down the field.
Rondale Moore is an explosive athlete.
Both of these players have a bright NFL future, but for what the New York Giants currently need, I think Waddle fits better. I like Waddle as a threat in a vertical attack, and if you need to be convincing, you need to turn on his game against Missouri. This is one of those games that has become almost legendary in reconnaissance circles. Imagine being involved in a Giants offense, perhaps with a free agency acquisition. We know that Daniel Jones has shown the ability to push the ball into the field – and perhaps more importantly, a willingness – and this suggests that Waddle is schematically an ideal fit.
Moore reminds me in a way of Laviska Shenault Jr. from last season, a player I loved. But also someone with an injury history, and someone who will have to make you offensive. This kind of player can be a welcome addition to many offenses, but with what the Giants are doing on the football side, the scheme can be a bit more of a mystery than anything else.
Nick Falato
Both of these players have an awful lot of explosiveness. Waddle seems to have an extra gear when defenders feel they have a corner. Rondale Moore’s ability to accelerate, stop and start while also cutting laterally is incredible. Both have good hips and both will be impact players in the NFL.
However, for some reason I am more comfortable with Waddle. Like Moore, but the nagging abdominal injuries have led to many missed matches. His touch is also more manufactured than anything else – lots of touch near or behind the line just to get him into space. It’s not necessarily his fault, and that does not mean he can not be a vertical threat if given the chance, but Waddle has already shown numerous unique skills down the field and trail walking skills.
Moore does not have to win as many as Waddle controversial catches. Both of these players have an incredible ability to play; I just feel Waddle has shown more true reception qualities and can be a bit explosive (which says a lot).
As for Moore, he is little of format (5-9), but he actually has a very good contact balance for a player who weighs 180 pounds. His skill set should work everywhere in the NFL, but some teams may not maximize him as well as others – unfortunately, I think the Giants are one of those teams. Jason Garrett’s play calling is much more about running route concepts that come down to the first, rather than getting playmakers into space and, you know, having plays made.
Garrett is a smart guy, and I’m sure he will adapt, but the vertical element of Waddle’s game makes me feel a little more comfortable, especially with Daniel Jones, who was not shy about throwing it deep. Waddle is not just a deep threat; he’s very well down, can suddenly drop off the line, and he blocks with stubbornness – sounds like a Joe Judge-type guy. In general, if they are healthy, both players are NFL receivers to be selected on the first day. I’m more satisfied with Waddle at the moment, but Moore’s skill is clear.
A
Valentine’s View
I definitely understand why anyone watching Rondale Moore’s movie would get excited. The young man is absolutely electric with the ball in his hands. However, I can not understand the idea of choosing Moore over Jaylen Waddle.
Look at what Moore did to the state of Ohio in 2018, then remember to pick up your jaw off the floor. It was an incredible display of play and athletics against one of the best approaches college football can offer to an NFL-caliber defense.
The problem is that it was 2018. Moore only played four games in 2019 due to a hamstring injury and three games in 2020 due to a “lower body” injury (this is not hockey, why would Purdue not just tell us what the injury was?).
I simply believe that guys who show in college that they are prone to injuries will not suddenly become 16-game rivals in the NFL. The grind is longer and the competition is bigger, faster and more physical. At 5 feet 9, 180 pounds of Moore is short but not small. He is rock solid and muscular. Injuries are injuries after all and the last two seasons it has been a red flag for me at least.
On top of that, you have to take the beautiful receiving totals of Moore (178 in 20 college games, almost 9 per game) with a grain of salt. Many of them are digging passes, which are in fact jet sweepers, swing passes or quick turns in the apartment. All of these are designed to simply get the ball in his hands, which is a great idea, but it is not necessarily an excellent receiver.
Moore demonstrates the ability to drive fairly good intermediate routes. He does not give you a whole host of disputed catches or even purely vertical routes. Its production mostly comes from designed catch-and-run goods.
Both players have a point-and-kick return capability, but Moore’s return of 6.9 yards per point and 19.4 yards per kick, compared to Waddle (19.3 yards per point, 23.4 yards per kick) .
Waddle did have the broken ankle, but in three seasons he averaged 18.9 yards on 106 catches. He showed the ability to win deep, to make contested catches and to run routes well enough to win in the intermediate area. He has Moore’s game-breaking ability, but he’s also a better receiver.
To be honest, I look at Waddle and think of DeSean Jackson. The Giant killer has never had more than 82 receptions in any of his 13 seasons, but his lightning speed has resulted in five seasons for 1,000 yards, 56 receiving touchdowns and a career average of 17.4 yards per catch. Combined with the return ability he showed early in his career, Jackson has always been one of the most influential players on the field, even though he was never the best pure receiver.
This is the kind of career I think Waddle can have.