Combine week creates noise in the draft market. The Upside Index scores are anchored to multi-year production data, which means combine results rarely move the UI needle significantly. But evaluator confidence shifts when athleticism matches production profile, and that moves ADP fast.
Why the combine creates perception shifts without moving UI scores
The combine measures athleticism, not football production. When a prospect's RAS score validates what the film already showed, the market confidence in that prospect increases—but the UI score does not change because UI is production-driven, not testing-driven. A fast 40 time on a prospect with elite production simply confirms the profile. A slow 40 time on a prospect with elite production creates cognitive dissonance in the market, even if the production data is clean. That gap between testing perception and production reality is where actual value often lives.
Risers: When athleticism validates production
This month's risers are prospects whose RAS scores validated their production profile. For example, a fast-twitch slot receiver with an elite production profile who runs a 40-time under 4.5 seconds sees market confidence rise. A pass-rusher with clean production metrics who tests out at the top percentile for burst and explosion sees draft capital shift upward. A center with rare combination of size, strength, and quick-feet testing confirms his utility in combination blocking schemes. When the testing aligns with the tape and the production, the board tightens around that prospect.
Fallers: Medical, scheme, and testing mismatches
Fallers this month include prospects with medical red flags emerged during combine evaluations, or prospects whose production metrics were already borderline and now have scheme concerns raised by coaching staffs at the combine. A developmental QB whose footwork issues were flagged on film review but thought to be correctable suddenly becomes higher-risk when positional coaches express skepticism. A project EDGE prospect with durability questions in his medical history becomes less attractive when team doctors conduct additional screening. A below-average-production receiver riding one viral highlight loses traction when there is medical concern or when coaches note scheme limitations at the combine.
The combine trap: Production beats testing, always
The data is clear: teams that over-index on 40 times and vertical jumps at the expense of production data consistently produce busts. The correlation is real and measurable. A prospect who tested elite but produced at below-average clip is more likely to be a bust than a prospect who tested below-average but produced at elite clip. Yet the market always wants to believe the testing. That is where disciplined evaluation extracts value: finding the prospects where production is real but testing is soft, and market overweights the testing.
Using the Big Board to cut through the noise
The UI Score does not change based on combine results because it is anchored to production data. It captures what the player did in games, not what he did in shorts at Indianapolis. That is the signal in the noise. When evaluating risers and fallers, use the filters on the Big Board to isolate prospects by score tier and then cross-reference their athletic profile (RAS) against the production metric (UI). The combination tells you whether the market is pricing confidence or panic. Then use that gap to make your own evaluation.
Watch the board shift into April
The board in late March looks different than it did in January. Use the 2026 Class filter to track this specific class and monitor which prospects have the combination of strong production AND validated athleticism. Those are the names where the gap between market perception and actual risk is narrowest. Equally important: identify the fallers where production is still elite but testing raised concerns. That is often where value lives.