Camps/On field play/physical attributes

[MJ2]

Which of the three mean the most in the assessment of a player?   Are there other key elements?

[cbjagman]

To me it's on the field play. Reason is very simple: ultimately it doesn't matter how well a young man might perform at a camp or combine. Physical attributes can certainly help, but it only takes you so far. It's how a kid performs on the field that makes him a success or failure as a player. Potential means nothing unless it translates  into performance on the field!! Kinda like a race horse that has all the appearance of a derby winner only to run like a nag.
 

[Amityvillehogger]

I agree with CBJAGMAN,

I feel like a player can run a 4.6, be 6'6 250 lbs, and is built like a brick s**t house, but......
If he can't react to what his eyes are seeing, it don't matter.

On field play is the most important.  It's all about heart with a little of the rest.

[wholehog92]

I was a good example of on the field play above my abilities as the counterpoint to these arguments.  I was too slow to play linebacker and too small to play DL on a D1 level.  I was still invited to walk on under Ford.  I asked him where I would play, meaning DE or LB, but he said scout team.  He told me I looked great on film and changed the game when I was on the field, but there's only so much football instinct and drive can do.

That experience leads me to believe you must have both measurables and game play to be an SEC player.  There are probably some D1 schools that you could work and play with one or the other.  In my opinion the camps are a place where competition is equalized for the kids in smaller schools to show how they compare to kids from larger schools playing tougher competition as well as get your name out to coaches.