-
Frank C said...
I don't have a 40 yard time for him but he's fast enough to be a legitimate dual-threat.
I think what endears Kizer to me is that he knows when to hang in the pocket and when to take off (something that Denard had to learn and is still working on improving). I just like players that are instinctive and have the intangibles.
WillyWolverine
- 5 stars Rating: 96
3811 votes total - (9056)
- 22 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
Ducksworth ●
- 5 stars Rating: 92
9009 votes total - Wolverine247 Moderator
- (15584)
- 25 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
WillyWolverine
- 5 stars Rating: 96
3811 votes total - (9056)
- 22 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
Ducksworth ●
- 5 stars Rating: 92
9009 votes total - Wolverine247 Moderator
- (15584)
- 25 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
Ducksworth said...
Sounds like it would actually be surprising if Webb and Westphal end up anywhere else, and we don't have a huge need at CB. Take those two and then obviously still pursue Peppers (especially if he's better as a S in college). If we can land those three, holy crap.
WillyWolverine
- 5 stars Rating: 96
3811 votes total - (9056)
- 22 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
WillyWolverine said...
I agree holy crap. I can't wait to see where the sites rank Webb. People keep saying he is one of the best players in the country.
I was reading the Tremendous blog the other day and they were talking about Westphal playing Safety or LB. Do you know anything about that?
Ducksworth ●
- 5 stars Rating: 92
9009 votes total - Wolverine247 Moderator
- (15584)
- 25 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
Ducksworth said...
I had never heard that - I've always had him pencilled in as a CB. He's only 6'0 180 - even if he grows 2 inches, CB still would make sense. Maybe he could slide to S (he and Peppers could be two hybrid players). Definitely not LB - size, not sure where they're getting that from.
As for Webb, I think he'll shoot up the radar when people evaluate him as a CB. He would have been a low-mid four star WR, but I think he's a high four star CB. Way early guesstimate would be 50-75 range.
WillyWolverine
- 5 stars Rating: 96
3811 votes total - (9056)
- 22 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
WillyWolverine said...
That's what i thought on Westphal as well. I wonder if Tremendous just made a mistake and their evaluation of Westphal was meant for another player.
I guess it would make sense for Peppers (he's already 6'1 200 and growing), but I don't know how you could get those two mixed up
Ducksworth ●
- 5 stars Rating: 92
9009 votes total - Wolverine247 Moderator
- (15584)
- 25 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
WillyWolverine
- 5 stars Rating: 96
3811 votes total - (9056)
- 22 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
Frank C said...
Disagree.
The game has changed and, unfortunately, most don't realize it.
Most people still think that lining up under center + dropping back automatically means pro-style. It doesn't. The passing spread has worked its way into the pro-style such that a formation which positions a QB under center can actually be a spread passing play designed to create gaps in space.
Moreover, while Kizer is more comfortable in a shotgun formation, he can be taught to play under center. On the other hand, Stewart can't be taught Kizer's speed and elusiveness.
Stealing Sparty's recruits and owning them on the field since 1898
msucantmakebcs
- 5 stars Rating: 83
1671 votes total - (4001)
- 21 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
inuyesta said...
Really like Frank C's posts on the past couple pages. The future of offense in football (both NFL and CFB) is a shotgun-based, pass-heavy attack that revolves around a versatile, athletic QB. Kizer fits that mold really well imo, certainly better than Stewart does.
WillyWolverine
- 5 stars Rating: 96
3811 votes total - (9056)
- 22 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
fursty13 said...
I don't know if that holds true to college football. Alabama and LSU didn't wow with their aerial attacks, and they were the two most dominant teams in college. I think a good defense can stop a good offense in college. However, in the NFL, I feel that a good offense will trump a good defense.
-
inuyesta said...
Really like Frank C's posts on the past couple pages. The future of offense in football (both NFL and CFB) is a shotgun-based, pass-heavy attack that revolves around a versatile, athletic QB. Kizer fits that mold really well imo, certainly better than Stewart does.
victorsclub ●
- 5 stars Rating: 86
852 votes total - (2197)
- 16 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
victorsclub said...
Tell that to Andrew Luck last years #1 pick or Matt Barkley more than likely this years #1 pick.
Play Andrew Luck one handed catch
Visit / Subscribe to The Cardinal Channel: http://youtube.ie/stanfordathletics For more information visit http://gostanford.com Like us on facebook: https://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Cardinal-Channel/235082623196055 Andrew Luck snags a throw in the Stanford vs. UCLA game on October 1, 2011
http://www.youtube.com/v/mpREd2fxnng -
victorsclub ●
- 5 stars Rating: 86
852 votes total - (2197)
- 16 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
inuyesta said...
I think you've presented a false choice here. Alabama and LSU were the best teams last year because they had dominant defenses, neither offense was at all special. But there's nothing mutually exclusive about having a dominant defense AND a dominant offense...imagine how much better of a team Alabama would be if it had had Oregon or Oklahoma State's offense?
I suppose the counterargument would be that if you have an offense that scores too quickly, then your defense won't get rest and will therefore be more tired and therefore less dominant...but it seems to me that if the bottom-line object is winning, it is better to have a team composed of elite defense + elite offense than elite defense + good or average offense or vice versa. A team comprised of Oregon's offense and Alabama's defense would probably give up more points than Alabama 2011-12 did, but it would probably also win more games and win them by a larger margin than Alabama 2011-12 did.
Too many complexities!
-
LEXwolverine1
- 5 stars Rating: 94
706 votes total - (1222)
- 15 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
WillyWolverine said...
My question to you on this is how do you fit power running attack into that? That is what Hoke wants as far as a running game goes.
Personally i see a more hybrid style offense where the passing downs are more shot gun but you take a very high percentage of 1st and 2nd down from under center.
This post was edited by msucantmakebcs on 7/5/2012 at 2:40 PM
Stealing Sparty's recruits and owning them on the field since 1898
msucantmakebcs
- 5 stars Rating: 83
1671 votes total - (4001)
- 21 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
WillyWolverine
- 5 stars Rating: 96
3811 votes total - (9056)
- 22 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
msucantmakebcs
- 5 stars Rating: 83
1671 votes total - (4001)
- 21 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
WillyWolverine
- 5 stars Rating: 96
3811 votes total - (9056)
- 22 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
WillyWolverine said...
My question to you on this is how do you fit power running attack into that? That is what Hoke wants as far as a running game goes.
Personally i see a more hybrid style offense where the passing downs are more shot gun but you take a very high percentage of 1st and 2nd down from under center.
wolverineblue
- 5 stars Rating: 95
1487 votes total - Bob Sacamano
- (2005)
- 17 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- Post a New Topic
- Back to Topics
- « Previous Topic
- Next Topic »
- Pages: 1 | ... | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | ... | 587
2014 Recruiting Thread (Updated 03.20.2013)