Scouting reports and player comparisons for Oregon Ducks revealed ahead of NFL Combine

Earlier this week, NFL.com released its player grades, scouting reports, and player comparisons for each player who received an invite to the 2024 NFL Combine.

Here’s a rundown of how the seven Oregon invitees graded out, as well as their listed scouting reports and player comparisons.

QB Box Nix

Prospect grade: 6.43 (4th among QBs)

Production score: 90 (3rd among QBs)

Athleticism score: 79 (7th among QBs)

Total score: 89 (3rd among QBs)

Player comparison: Tony Romo

Overview: “Rare five-year starting quarterback whose play has matured in front of our eyes. Nix displays the accuracy, arm talent and athleticism consistent with today’s brand of pro quarterback. He can be punctual in getting the ball out at the top of his drop or he can work through progressions and beat defenses with second-reaction plays. He throws with good velocity and puts the ball on the money when throwing on the move. Nix has shown great improvement with his pocket poise. He’s capable of moving the sticks as a scrambler or as part of the running game. Some of his gaudy production has been driven by the Oregon offense’s design, but his talent clearly stands out. I’ve harbored bias from watching the overwhelmed version of Nix during his Auburn days, but as the saying goes, “tape don’t lie.” Nix appears more than ready to attack the league with an NFL-caliber skill set.” – Lance Zierlein

RB Bucky Irving

Prospect grade: 6..17 (7th among RBs)

Production score: 78 (3rd among RBs)

Athleticism score: 77 (9th among RBs)

Total score: 80 (2nd among RBs)

Player comparison: Dameon Pierce

Overview: “Compact and willful, Irving is deeply committed to each run his play-caller trusts him with. Irving punches above his weight class with excellent contact balance and leg drive to fight through tackles and squeeze every yard out of the run. For being such a high-effort runner, Irving has a remarkably low fumble rate. He is frequently in a rush and would rather run through a wall than around it, but he does have the agility to make tacklers miss with wide, lateral cuts when he runs with better patience. Irving isn’t ready for NFL protection duties but can help as a pass catcher. He can step in quickly as a hard-charging complementary piece that helps keep the chains moving on the ground.” – Lance Zierlein

WR Troy Franklin

Prospect grade: 6.40 (5th among WRs)

Production score: 88 (4th among WRs)

Athleticism score: 74 (16th among WRs)

Total score: 85 (3rd among WRs)

Player comparison: Chris Olave

Overview: “The puzzle pieces are fairly easy to put together when assessing who Franklin is and who he could be in the NFL. He’s a tall, linear receiver with good speed. He’s sudden enough to beat press but lacks the play strength to win combat catches and fight for operating space underneath. He has an innate talent for avoiding traffic and maintaining his distance from pursuit after the catch on crossing routes on all three levels. Franklin might not get WR1 target volume, but he should be productive with a high yards-per-catch average and the ability to open things up underneath for his teammates. Franklin could become a coveted complementary piece for an established WR1 or a productive vertical target for a team looking for instant help in the passing game.” – Lance Zierlein

OL Jackson Powers-Johnson

Prospect grade: 6.34 (2nd among Cs)

Production score: 79 (2nd among Cs)

Athleticism score: 82 (2nd among Cs)

Total score: 86 (1st among Cs)

Player comparison: Quinn Meinerz

Overview: “Broadly built center prospect with below-average length but above-average upper-body power. Powers-Johnson isn’t much of a knee-bender, which impacts his pad level and drive leverage, but he can torque and toss opponents around with some regularity at the point. Powers-Johnson is a fierce competitor with a salty disposition but needs to improve his first-phase technique to create more consistent block sustains. Despite average athleticism, he doesn’t seem to have many issues in pass protection, as he works with clear eyes, a wide base and good discipline to keep his weight back. His rookie season could be bumpy if he has to play early, but he should come out on the other side as a long-time starter.” – Lance Zierlein

DE Brandon Dorlus

Prospect grade: 6.16 (11th among DEs)

Production score: 64 (2nd among DEs)

Athleticism score: 68 (2nd among DEs)

Total score: 66 (2n among DEs)

Player comparison: Carlos Basham

Overview: “Physical, heavy-handed defender whose pedestrian production could see an increase at the pro level. Dorlus is a fairly natural edge defender who can play standing or with a hand down. He doesn’t play with desired instincts or awareness in the run game but has the upper-body power to become a more forceful edge-setter or interior penetrator in the future. He shows an impressive ability to slide and slap his way around blockers for quick wins, even though the sack total fails to show it. Dorlus is a natural fit as a power end in a 4-3 or 3-4, but teams might want him to add weight and take on a role as a full-time 3-technique.” – Lance Zierlein

CB Khyree Jackson

Prospect grade: 6.15 (20th among CBs)

Production score: 64 (27th among CBs)

Athleticism score: 68 (31st among CBs)

Total score: 66 (32nd among CBs)

Player comparison: Brandon Facyson

Overview: “Extremely imposing outside cornerback with rare size and strength. Jackson’s measurables are a big plus, but he started just 14 games during his college career, so the technique is inconsistent. He can be hit-or-miss from press, but when he catches the receiver with his punch, it’s trouble. A lack of anticipation and sticky hips cause him to get lost at transition points at times. Contested catches tilt heavily in his favor and will continue to do so as he improves with more coaching and experience. Jackson’s size and physicality combined with his NFL-caliber run support should make him an early backup with a chance to climb the ladder into a starting role if he proves he has the necessary speed.” – Lance Zierlein

S Evan Williams

Prospect grade: 5.80 (19th among safeties)

Production score: 65 (11th among safeties)

Athleticism score: 63 (23rd among safeties)

Total score: 63 (15th among safeties)

Player comparison: n/a

Overview: “Williams was a tad more consistent in 2022 while at Fresno State, but he was also put in better position to succeed. He is broad-hipped with limited agility and athleticism to align too far away from the line of scrimmage. He’s a box safety with a good feel for finding entry points and making tackles near the line. He can match up underneath and is average in zone but will allow too many big plays against NFL wideouts. He has a chance to impress on special teams but inconsistent open-field tackling could hurt his chances of becoming a viable backup strong safety.” Lance Zierlein