Prospect watch: Gateway's Todd Jeter
6-foot, 175 pounds, WR-CB, Gateway
The scouting report on Todd Jeter was that he was a Division I talent as a defensive back but didn't have the grades to be eligible. That changed a month ago, after he boosted his SAT score. By then, his only scholarship offers were from FCS Eastern Kentucky and Division II Indiana (Pa.).
His fortune changed this past Tuesday, a day before signing day. That's when former Gateway coach Terry Smith, now the receivers coach at Temple, called with some interesting news. Smith had shown Jeter's highlight tape to Temple's secondary coach, and the Owls were offering Jeter a scholarship.
“I was real excited because it was random,” Jeter said. “I couldn't get the smile off my face. I wanted to play D-I. I took the Temple offer right on the spot, right when he asked me.”
A first-year starter this past fall, Jeter used his 4.5-second speed in the 40-yard dash to create separation at receiver and had 14 receptions for 273 yards and two touchdowns.
Defensively, he jammed opponents at the line of scrimmage and specialized in downfield coverage on defense and had two interceptions, including one against North Allegheny's Mack Leftwich, a UTEP recruit.
Jeter was the lone senior starter in a secondary that featured Division I prospects Anthony Davis, Montae Nicholson and Delvon Randall. Smith had called the group one of the nation's best last fall. On signing day, Jeter awoke at 5 a.m. and was at school by 7, ready to fax his national letter of intent to Temple.
His signing was something of a surprise, as Jeter joined quarterback Thomas Woodson (Akron) and fullback Jaymar Parrish (Pitt) as the third Gator and 19th WPIAL player to sign with a an FBS school.
“I have an opportunity to show how good I am to everybody on a bigger stage,” Jeter said.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.