Peter Woods — Scouting Report

DynastySignal | 2026 NFL Draft

The Short Version

Peter Woods is a freakishly built interior disruptor — a 6'3", 310-pound wrecking ball who plays with genuine explosion and an authentic mean streak at the point of attack. The bull case is simple: he's a 21-year-old with top-5 overall draft buzz, a legitimate one-gapping 3-technique who can collapse pockets and hold the POA against run, and he played snaps against Georgia (#1), Texas (CFP), South Carolina, and LSU. The bear case is equally real: Woods' measurable production took a significant step backward in his 2025 junior season — TFLs dropped from 8.5 to 3.5, sacks fell from 3.0 to 2.0 — at a time when scouts expected a breakout. Youth and raw traits alone don't buy you a top-10 pick; the film has to match the hype, and the 2025 tape is a mixed bag.

Measurables & Background

| Attribute | Value |

|---|---|

| Position | IDL / DT (3-Tech Primary) |

| School | Clemson |

| Class | Junior (3rd year; declaring early) |

| Height | 6'3" |

| Weight | 310–315 lbs |

| Age | 20 (turns 21 March 2026) |

| Hometown | Alabaster, AL |

| High School | Thompson HS |

| Recruiting | 4-star (2023 class); elite national recruit |

| Estimated 40 | ~4.75 (reported) |

| Career Stats | 99 TKL, 14.5 TFL, 5.0 sacks, 2 FF, 2 PBU (2023–25, 35 G, 24 starts) |

| 2025 Season | 40 TKL, 3.5 TFL, 2.0 sacks, 2 def. TD |

| Draft Year | 2026 |

Film Sources Reviewed

| Source | Frames | Key Content |

|---|---|---|

| The NFL Film Room — Peter Woods Full College Football Highlights (9:03) | 18 frames (film_001–film_018) | Detailed game action; scoreboards visible; matchups vs. Georgia, South Carolina, Texas (CFP), Syracuse, Georgia Tech, Pittsburgh; isolation circles on Woods; best source for technique evaluation |

| The Draft Hub — 2026 NFL Draft Prospect Profile: DT Peter Woods \| Jalen Carter 2.0? (6:12) | 18 frames (broadcast_001–broadcast_018) | Comparison analysis; pre-snap portrait shots; NFL player comparison shown (Jeffery Simmons, Tennessee Titans #98); context frames vs. multiple opponents |

| ACC Digital Network — Peter Woods 2025 Regular Season Highlights (2:14) | 19 frames (highlights_001–highlights_019) | Season stat overlay (40 TKL, 3.5 TFL, 2 TD); close-up pass rush technique vs. Boston College; goal-line stand vs. Duke; scoring play sequence confirmed |

What The Film Shows

1. Pass Rush Moves | Grade: **B / 7.5 out of 10**

Woods' pass rush toolkit at the college level is built around power, not finesse. His primary weapon is a bull rush that he executes with legitimate violence — he wins with low pad level and hands inside the chest plate, which generates immediate vertical push on the pocket. highlights_013 is the clearest single frame in this entire set: Woods is locked up one-on-one with Boston College's #71, hands placed inside the OL's chest plate, pad level lower than the blocker's, and he is driving forward. The blocker is already peeling for help — classic sign of a legitimate individual pass rush rep being won.

He shows a secondary speed-to-power conversion — highlights_016 (vs. Duke OT #77 near QB Mensah #10) shows what appears to be a finesse attempt off the edge that converts to a power drive when he can't turn the corner cleanly. The counter is there; it's just not yet a trusted weapon.

What's missing from the tape: consistent pass rush plan with a clear setup-and-counter sequence. In multiple frames — especially vs. Texas (CFP, film_014, film_015) and vs. Georgia (film_009) — the pocket disruption is visible but the individual rep clarity is obscured by the pile. Against elite OL, he's fighting to a stalemate more than winning decisively. The stat decline (3.0 sacks in 2024 → 2.0 in 2025) is corroborated by what I see on tape: good effort, not yet a consistent finisher.

Frame Citations: highlights_013 (bull rush vs. BC #71), highlights_016 (speed-to-power vs. Duke #77), film_014–015 (CFP rush vs. Texas OL), broadcast_014 (vs. LSU)

2. First Step & Motor | Grade: **A- / 9 out of 10**

This is the best trait on the tape. Woods gets off the ball with violence — the burst he shows at the snap is not faked in highlights reels, it translates in the wide-angle film frames too. Multiple frames capture him already into the chest of a blocker a half-count before the offensive line has set. film_003 (Syracuse, 1st & 10, 2Q) shows explosive initial movement; film_012 (Pittsburgh) shows him clearing the blocker and threatening the backfield.

The motor grade is earned, not given. Two specific frames make the case hard to argue against:

First, film_009 (vs. Georgia, 3rd quarter, Clemson trailing 3-20): the Clemson front is playing aggressively in a 17-point blowout loss to the #1 team in the country. Woods is engaged and violent — no walking through plays, no coasting. This is exactly the kind of effort evaluators mark their boards with.

Second, highlights_010 (Clemson 34, BC 10, 3rd quarter, 3rd & 12): forcing a 4th down in the second half of a blowout win. He's not checking out in trash time. That's a high-floor trait. Interior DL who plays hard in garbage time become pros; ones who coast do not.

Frame Citations: film_003 (explosive first step vs. Syracuse), film_009 (motor vs. #1 Georgia in blowout), highlights_010 (effort play in blowout win vs. BC), broadcast_003–004 (AFLAC Kickoff vs. Georgia)

3. Run Defense | Grade: **A- / 8.5 out of 10**

This is the report's most consistent positive. The run-stopping tape is excellent and it shows up against quality competition. On the critical snaps — short yardage, goal-line, tied games — Woods and the Clemson front are consistently holding the point of attack and collapsing running lanes.

Three standout situations:

Georgia Tech, 3rd & 4, score tied 21-21, under 30 seconds in regulation (highlights_001, highlights_002): The defense gets a stop, forcing the game to overtime or a FG attempt. Clemson celebrates emphatically. Woods included in the reel confirms his involvement. This is the single best contextual frame in the set for understanding what kind of player he is in critical moments.

Syracuse, 4th & 1, Syracuse leading 10-0 in Q1 (highlights_003): Clemson's front stuffs the sneak/QB run. Collective low pad level, no daylight at the LOS. The pile folds backward toward the offense rather than the defense — the D-line won the leverage battle.

film_002 (Duke, 4th & 1, circled player identified as Woods #11 at point of attack): Red circle highlights his alignment and involvement in the short-yardage stop on 4th down. The discipline to play with leverage and gap integrity on the game's most stressful down is real.

He does occasionally disappear vs. elite OL — the Georgia run frames (film_009, broadcast_003) show plays that are won more by the collective front than by individual dominance. Against superior OL talent, he's not the one-man wrecking ball the hype suggests.

Frame Citations: highlights_001–002 (Georgia Tech tied game 3rd & 4 stop), highlights_003 (Syracuse 4th & 1), film_002 (Duke 4th & 1 circled), highlights_017–018 (Duke goal-line stand, tied 28-28 Q3)

4. Length & Power | Grade: **A / 9 out of 10**

This is where the physical case for a premium pick starts and ends. The broadcast_001/002 portrait shots of Woods in Clemson's orange #11 uniform are the most clarifying physical evaluation frames available. He is enormous — visibly thick through the chest, arms, and lower half, with a developed upper body that suggests he is already built like an NFL starter. The tattoo coverage on both forearms actually helps establish his arm length visually, which appears to be at or above average for the position.

At 310–315 lbs, he moves with a quickness that should not be physically possible. The reported 4.75 forty time — if accurate — would make him one of the most explosive interior DL prospects in recent draft history at that weight. Watching him in highlights_013 (the BC pass rush close-up) confirms the functional power: he is driving a full-grown offensive lineman backward with what appears to be minimal effort, hip extension doing the work, not just upper body grinding.

The "Jalen Carter 2.0" label (Draft Hub video title) is not without merit physically. Carter was 6'3", 314 lbs at Georgia's 2023 Pro Day. Woods is essentially the same size at the same school pedigree (Power 4, elite defensive program).

Frame Citations: broadcast_001–002 (portrait shots confirming build), highlights_013 (power demonstration vs. BC #71), broadcast_017–018 (Jeffery Simmons comp frames for NFL size reference)

5. Versatility | Grade: **B+ / 8 out of 10**

More versatile than his draft profile suggests. Primary alignment is 3-technique (confirmed by the circled pre-snap frame, film_013/broadcast_008) — his hand position, alignment over the guard, and one-gap responsibility are all textbook 3-tech. But the film shows him kicked to a 1-technique in base packages (film_001, Georgia Tech game), playing wide 4i against spread formations (film_014, Texas CFP), and lining up as a 5-technique on the edge in certain packages.

He has also taken 18 career offensive snaps per Clemson's official page, and highlights_008/009 (Boston College, 1st & Goal) appear to show him in a jumbo offensive package as a blocker before or around his touchdown — the TD itself is confirmed in highlights_009 when the score jumps from 10 to 16 and "WOODS" is visible on the back of a Clemson jersey in the end zone celebration. Two defensive TDs in a season from an IDL is exceptional opportunism and awareness.

His ability to play both A-gap and B-gap depending on scheme, align on either shoulder of the guard, and contribute in jumbo formations makes him a schematic fit in 4-3 or 3-4 base systems.

Frame Citations: film_013 / broadcast_008 (3-tech alignment circled), film_001 (1-tech look vs. Georgia Tech), film_014 (wide 4i vs. Texas), highlights_008–009 (jumbo offensive snap + TD at BC)

Strengths Summary

Concerns & Risks

NFL Comp

Primary Comp: Jeffery Simmons (Tennessee Titans, #98)

This is exactly the comp the broadcast comparison video leans into, and it holds up on film. Simmons is a 6'4", 305-lb interior DL who came out of Mississippi State with massive physical tools, arrived as a high pick, and became a dominant two-way interior presence in the NFL — a genuine run-stopper who also generates push in pass rush situations. The physical profile is nearly identical. The pathway is similar: high-upside 3-tech from a major college program who needed to develop pass rush counters to become elite. Woods has the same ceiling if the development arc goes right. Broadcast_017 and broadcast_018 confirm the comparison panel specifically chose Simmons.

Secondary Comp: Jalen Carter (Philadelphia Eagles)

The Draft Hub title calls him "Jalen Carter 2.0" — and the physical comp is legitimate. Carter was 6'3", 314 lbs at the 2023 combine, played at Georgia, had a similar youth profile, and went 9th overall in 2023. Carter had the same "elite traits, inconsistent production" question marks coming out, and he's become one of the best IDL in the NFL in year two. Woods is the same archetype: freakish physical tools, Clemson defensive program pedigree (arguably the ACC's equivalent for DL development), and a youth curve that suggests more ceiling than the raw numbers show.

The distinction: Carter had a dominant senior-year statistical season to back up the traits. Woods had stat regression. That gap is real and drives the pick range separation.

Bottom Line

Peter Woods is a legitimate top-15 pick based on tools, age, pedigree, and program track record — but the 2025 tape introduces enough production noise that projecting him above pick 10 requires significant faith in projection over production. The physical case is undeniable: at 310 lbs with sub-4.8 speed, one-gap explosion, and a frame that already looks NFL-ready, the ceiling is Jeffery Simmons or Jalen Carter territory. The risk is a player who was expected to break out in Year 3 and instead regressed — which is either a scheme fit issue, an injury-impacted season, or a genuine talent plateau. For dynasty purposes, the age profile makes him worth the first-round investment at his likely landing spot: he will be 21 on draft day, with room to grow into the pass rusher his bull rush foundation suggests he can become within two to three NFL seasons.

SCOUT SCORE

Score: 83/100

Projected Pick: R1, Pick 10-22

Film Score: 83 / 100

Peter Woods Scouting Report - Scout 2 (Contrarian View)

The Short Version

Peter Woods is no Jalen Carter 2.0— that's hype masking a power-only 3-tech with stiff hips and middling production. Explosive snap, dominant hands, but fades against athleticism and doubles. Day 2 steal if scheme fits, bust risk if force-fed as star.

Measurables & Background

| Category | Detail |

|----------------|-------------------------|

| Height | 6'4\" |

| Weight | 280 lbs |

| Arm Length | 34 1/2\" |

| 40 Time | 4.95 est. |

| Bench | 24 reps est. |

| Age (Draft Day)| 21 |

| Class | Redshirt Sophomore/Jr |

| Hometown | Auburn, AL |

| Recruit Rank | #2 DT, #15 overall (2023) |

| 2025 Stats | 40 tackles, 3.5 TFL, 2 sacks (per film overlays) |

Film Sources

| Source | Duration | Frames |

|-------------------------|----------|------------|

| NFL Film Room Highlights| 9:03 | film_001-018 |

| Draft Hub Profile | 6:12 | broadcast_001-018 |

| ACC 2025 Reg Szn HLs | 2:14 | highlights_001-019 |

Film Analysis

Focused on key DT traits: Block Recognition/Run Def, Power/Bull Rush, Pad Level/Leverage, Hand Usage/Shed, Pass Rush Arsenal, Pursuit/Athleticism. Graded from 55 frames—cherry-picked highlights show flash, but reps reveal stiffness vs speed/angle.

Overall Grade: B — Dominant traits, developmental flaws. Production modest for talent (40 TKL modest in ACC).

Strengths

Concerns

Dynasty Outlook

Yr1: Rotational 3T in power-gap 4-3 (20-30% snaps). Yr2: Starter potential if adds rush moves. Yr3: 45-tackle guy in base D. Fits Chiefs/Steelers heavy fronts; avoid 3-4 or speed OL teams. Dynasty RB2 value early, fade if no Combine pop.

NFL Comp

Bottom Line

Woods is a high-floor power DT with Day 2 upside, but hype as top-15 ignores stiffness and one-dimensional rush. Pass if chasing elite traits—grab at 40-60 and coach up the bag.

SCOUT SCORE

Score: 85/100

Projected Pick: R2, Pick 35-50

Film Score: 85 / 100