The CardBoard
Wide receivers....the good and not so good - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Wide receivers....the good and not so good (/thread-1815.html)


Wide receivers....the good and not so good - Redrum - 08-17-2011

One phenom, one possession receiver,  one position change that seems to be working out and a freshman.  Those are the guys who are catching Coach Shaw's eye at WR.    The bad news  two highly rated recruits from two years ago:  Jamal Rashad Patterson seems to be pulling a disappearing act.  Ditto Jemari Roberts.    Of course,  one day's praise for some players doesn't mean others are on the outs....except we haven't heard too much of those two 4-stars since LOI day of 2009.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/08/16/SP0P1KO7RC.DTL



Re: Wide receivers....the good and not so good - washingtonismoney - 08-17-2011

Well, except for Harbaugh's burning Patterson's redshirt for a touchdown and not much else his freshman year. I've never quite been able to figure out the point of that, especially since the criticism of Patterson, apparently, is that he didn't know the playbook. Getting that straightened out seems like the purpose of a redshirt year, no?

Re: Wide receivers....the good and not so good - washingtonismoney - 08-17-2011

On a more positive note, here's the running backs preview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EICInLTERwE&feature=youtu.be&hd=1

Re: Wide receivers....the good and not so good - yvonne - 08-17-2011

That was a really high quality and entertaining video. Thanks, WiM!  It's great to see that we're so stocked at running back, and should have a good running game going forward.

Speaking of depth at RB, I wonder what happened to Braveheart, and I wonder whether he's the same as Trojan Warrior, who visits the Bear Insider. As much as we need subway fans, dealing at those from other schools gives me pause about what wooing them would do.

Re: Wide receivers....the good and not so good - fullmetal - 08-17-2011

So we are looking at pretty much a RBBC?

Yup. Running Back By Committee - Redrum - 08-17-2011

Fact is, its how the OL functions as a unit this year that has MUCH more importance for our running game.  For reasons not yet clear,  we are still on the shortlist for Barry Sanders Jr.    My guess is that's a sub-10% possibility.  Maybe waaaay more sub.  RBBC might be a negative in is eyes.  OTOH,  all that really matters is winning.  If splitting carries between Taylor, Wilkerson, Stewart and Gaffney gets wins,  the rest is all a bonus.   

Re: Wide receivers....the good and not so good - terry - 08-17-2011

(08-17-2011, 11:41 AM)fullmetal link Wrote:So we are looking at pretty much a RBBC?

Last year at this time, the conventional wisdom was that Stanford would use "running back by committee" to replace Gerhart. That didn't really turn out to be the case. Taylor emerged as the clear # 1. That was partly because Stewart and Gaffney missed some time with injuries and Wilkerson was a freshman just getting up to speed. Gaffney did get some carries when he was healthy, and Wilkerson got more carries in the second half of the season. But still, Taylor was the main man. Taylor got 223 carries compared to 89 for Wilkerson, 60 for Gaffney, 28 for Amanam, and 18 for Stewart. My guess is that the coaches probably will settle on a # 1 RB this year also, but that's just a guess.

Re: Wide receivers....the good and not so good - fullmetal - 08-17-2011

Hopefully Wilkerson understands the blocking schemes well enough to slot in 50% of the snaps.  Fresh legs are always good for a running game.

I wonder if we'll be operating on a tight-end-by-committee basis as well...I'd have thought Fleener would get the nod for his consistency last year.  Hard to believe that Fleener is behind Toilolo and Ertz in the race at the moment!

Re: Wide receivers....the good and not so good - washingtonismoney - 08-17-2011

Well, the difference between having a lot of good running backs and a lot of good tight ends is you can put multiple TEs on the field at once. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the staff is working on a three or even four tight end formation.

Re: Wide receivers....the good and not so good - terry - 08-17-2011

We're definitely going to see a lot of formations that use 2 or 3 of our TEs. If will be interesting to see what the opponents do when we send in 3 TEs. Our TEs should create some tough match-up problems for our opponents.

Quibbling over a definition of "by committee" - Redrum - 08-17-2011

I've watched enough teams that depended on (basically) ONE running back:  South Carolina w/ Marcus Lattimore  or Oregon State w/  Jacquizz Rodgers  or  Arkansas w/ Knile Davis.   

By those standards,  Stanford is "running back by committee"  No argument that Taylor got most of the carries,  but lots of other guys did, too.

Re: Wide receivers....the good and not so good - fullmetal - 08-17-2011

Knile Davis blew up his knee recently, btw.  Season-ending I think.  Next up is Ronnie Wingo Jr. for the Razorbacks.

Re: Wide receivers....the good and not so good - JohnR34231 - 08-19-2011

Based on the latest reports it sounds like Patterson's problem is consistency. This is presumably a fixable problem, although it seems like he's taking a while to get the message. Hopefully he eventually will.

Re: Wide receivers....the good and not so good - cardfan09 - 08-19-2011

I know you're probably not using the term "possession receiver" as a pejorative for Terrell, but I still want to say that I think he has a lot of promise.  Good routs, good hands, and the quickness and shiftiness that makes him a good punt returner.  He could be special in the slot.

Re: Wide receivers....the good and not so good - fullmetal - 08-19-2011

Fleener is still listed as the TE1 on the depth chart SI released today (what do they know anyway).  I remember a snippet from this week saying that Ertz and Toilolo were actually ahead of Fleener.  Odd.  This has relevance to my college fantasy league draft, which just wrapped up today.

Re: Wide receivers....the good and not so good - JohnR34231 - 08-19-2011

I think most prospects at least give lip service to academics (it's only when they don't that it's significant). Some mean it; some don't. I do agree that if Watkins' parents are MIT grads he probably means it.

Only ONE test - Redrum - 08-19-2011

Did they GET and application and did they fill it out?  Everything else is just yamma-yamma-yamma.

Re: Only ONE test - Griffins78 - 08-19-2011

(08-19-2011, 12:44 PM)Redrum link Wrote:Did they GET and application and did they fill it out?  Everything else is just yamma-yamma-yamma.
Which player are you referring to?

Re: Wide receivers....the good and not so good - JohnR34231 - 08-19-2011

I think Redrum is talking in generalities here. The true test of whether a prospect is interested in Stanford or not is not what he tells some recruiting analyst, but whether he is willing to spend the time filling out and turning in the admissions application.

Re: Wide receivers....the good and not so good - Griffins78 - 08-19-2011

Thanks, JPRI. I guess that application info is something our coaching staff does know about the players they're recruiting and our recruiting competitors want to know and us fans would like to know.