first was a comment i saw on draftpanthers.com about drafting him and i saw a comment they had received from matt elder who has done a lot of good stuff with nfl draft sites network, particularly buffalobillsdraft.com.
anyway....i saw this on the kugbila pick
“Nasty player who plays with an edge and finished his blocks. He was over shadowed a bit by Gene Upshaw Award finalist Ryan Schraeder at OT. He’s very good blocking in the phone booth but can move as well. His SS time 4.65 is nuts for a 315+ guy. He played as high as 330 and is a bit sloppy in his build. He has power in his hands and can stun the defender with his punch. Technically he’s raw and he doesn’t get great leverage. Needs some time but a high upside guy.”
and then also this from gettleman's conversation on the radio this morning when talking about the pick and how it wasn't a reach (via http://www.catscratchreader.com/2013/5/2/4292870/dave-gettleman-interview-with-wfnz).
The forth round selection of Edmund Kugbila was the most controversial pick of the weekend, but he had a very simple answer to a big question: "No, it was not a reach". When evaluating a small-school player, Dave Gettleman talked about how you need to see him dominating at that competition level, then project whether you could see him doing the same at the highest level. He felt this way about Kugbila.
and i think that's the right view to take with any small school guy rather than just simply writing them off.
you don't want competitive at that level, you want dominant. then you look at the measurables and how it stacks against people already in the league and see if it will translate.
kugbila definitely was dominant. he was a man among kids in a playground from the way it looked. you look at his size, strength, awareness, reactiveness, and speed and compare it to others not just in the draft, but in the league and he most definitely is someone who can compete in the NFL....and i said can, not will, but that's true with anyone you draft.