On the live board, bust risk sits at 35% and the realistic range is No. 100 to No. 252.
The model graded Tyler Loop at pick #237; he was actually picked #186 by BAL. 1 NFL season in, he's barely gotten on the field (grading -3.3 of 20 per season).
Headline grade, verdict, and the one-line scout take
Draftanomics had Tyler Loop at #237 on draft night — a Day 3 grade — and BAL took him at No. 186. Bust risk projects at 35%, near the position baseline.
Written from the live model's numbers — projected to round 7, and it updates whenever the model does. See methodology for what drives the take.
The written report — drafted from the fact sheet, every number traceable, honest about what we can't see yet
Which signals drove the grade up or down — in plain English
The analyst room, accuracy-weighted, plus where Draftanomics disagrees with it
Measurables, traits, and college play quality
Bust probability, injury history, character flags, pre-mortem
How well this prospect fits each of the 32 team schemes
Probability he's still on the board at each of your picks
Historical players this prospect resembles
Clips, scout notes, voice memos, written reports
Too early to project a career arc.
No public board has ranked this prospect and the model has no production, athletic, or NFL data to anchor on — any percentages here would be noise dressed up as precision. The outlook fills in once boards rank him or real numbers land.
No public-board coverage yet.
Highlight reels indexed from YouTube. Loads only when you press play.
The grade is held down by lowest board ranking, age, and how many boards rank him top-100.
The grade is the 0-to-1 score the board sorts by — it only means something next to the rest of this class, which is why the rank above it is the number to quote.
Not enough to go on yet — no public board ranks him and there's no production or testing data to anchor a career projection.
Solid points = actual NFL snap share per season. Dashed extension = forecast for upcoming years.
Everything that could go wrong with Tyler Loop, gathered in one place — the most serious flags listed first.
Named, concrete signals — every flag cites numbers, comp players, or schedule context.
Closest historical matches among prior Specialists prospects who were drafted, by overall statistical profile. A smaller distance means a closer match.
| Player | Pos | Year | Pick | Snap trajectory | Career arc | Distance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Justin Rohrwasser | K | 2020 | #159 | no data | TBD | 1.57 |
| Sterling Hofrichter | P | 2020 | #228 | →0 pts | Bust | 1.78 |
| Tyler Bass | K | 2020 | #188 | →0 pts | Bust | 2.73 |
| Trenton Gill | P | 2022 | #255 | →0 pts | Bust | 2.74 |
| Pressley Harvin III | P | 2021 | #254 | →0 pts | Bust | 2.85 |
Roster-based need returns once the 2024 season is played — grading this year’s teams on last year’s depth chart would be guessing. What’s knowable now: the teams holding picks around No. 237, and which of them already spent premium capital at Specialists in the 2024 draft.
Gold means no recent premium investment at Specialists — the cleaner fit on paper. Grey means they already spent one.