01-23-2013, 02:06 PM
Does anyone think that this coming season will be a rebuilding season? We look good on defense, but we lost our center, top running back, and all receiving threats.
2013 -- rebuilding year?
01-23-2013, 02:15 PM
There are a lot of questions on offense; as well as the players you mentioned, we also lost Pep as OC. It remains to be seen which of these is the biggest loss; right now, I'm saying Ertz, but my opinion may change in a few months' time. In any case, I can't wait til the spring game to see what the offense will be like. On the downside, they'll be playing against our defense, who'll most likely be the better unit on the day, so who knows how much we'll actually be able to take away from the game.
There are a lot of questions on offense; as well as the players you mentioned, we also lost Pep as OC. It remains to be seen which of these is the biggest loss; right now, I'm saying Ertz, but my opinion may change in a few months' time. In any case, I can't wait til the spring game to see what the offense will be like. On the downside, they'll be playing against our defense, who'll most likely be the better unit on the day, so who knows how much we'll actually be able to take away from the game.
01-23-2013, 02:54 PM
Heck no. Returning most of the defense, including depth at key spots. Returning 4/5 of our OLine, our starting QB, and the all purpose Mr Hewitt (FB or TE). I think Spring will be great for identifying the skill position players that can be plugged into the system to maximize the offense. Losing Ertz and Taylor is a lot of yards, but replacing them seems easier to do that replacing Luck, Decastro, Martin and Fleener was last year. Finding a good center who can call out the blocking scheme may end up being the hardest void to fill.
Heck no. Returning most of the defense, including depth at key spots. Returning 4/5 of our OLine, our starting QB, and the all purpose Mr Hewitt (FB or TE). I think Spring will be great for identifying the skill position players that can be plugged into the system to maximize the offense. Losing Ertz and Taylor is a lot of yards, but replacing them seems easier to do that replacing Luck, Decastro, Martin and Fleener was last year. Finding a good center who can call out the blocking scheme may end up being the hardest void to fill.
01-23-2013, 02:58 PM
There will no doubt be some growing pains for the offence in 2013, but the performances of some of the remaining players and the potential of some of the recruits makes me think we could have a good offence that will get us to a BCS bowl again, given what should be a great defence. First and foremost is quarterback - Hogan will absorb a lot in the off-season. I also think Kelsey Young did really well when he got touches this past season, and has the potential to be really explosive. I also think Wilkerson will be motivated to step up and fill in to some extent from Stepfan, and that one of the other young backs (Sanders, Wright) will also add to the mix. Hopefully Montgomery will recover some of the playmaking abilities he displayed at the end of the 2011 season, and Hewitt continues to be a dependable FB. Finally, don't forget we have four starters coming back on the O-line.
There will no doubt be some growing pains for the offence in 2013, but the performances of some of the remaining players and the potential of some of the recruits makes me think we could have a good offence that will get us to a BCS bowl again, given what should be a great defence. First and foremost is quarterback - Hogan will absorb a lot in the off-season. I also think Kelsey Young did really well when he got touches this past season, and has the potential to be really explosive. I also think Wilkerson will be motivated to step up and fill in to some extent from Stepfan, and that one of the other young backs (Sanders, Wright) will also add to the mix. Hopefully Montgomery will recover some of the playmaking abilities he displayed at the end of the 2011 season, and Hewitt continues to be a dependable FB. Finally, don't forget we have four starters coming back on the O-line.
01-23-2013, 03:10 PM
Define "rebuilding year."
I think the rankings placing us as a top five team are an instance of irrational exuberance, for the exact reasons you mentioned. But then again I can't see us falling out of the top fifteen in most reasonable scenarios (i.e. no injury/crime waves, major scandals, and various other asteroid-from-nowhere calamities that randomly strike programs). Would finishing 2013 at, say, 9-3 ranked #13 be rebuilding? I don't think so, so I wouldn't say 2013 looks like a rebuilding year.
I think the rankings placing us as a top five team are an instance of irrational exuberance, for the exact reasons you mentioned. But then again I can't see us falling out of the top fifteen in most reasonable scenarios (i.e. no injury/crime waves, major scandals, and various other asteroid-from-nowhere calamities that randomly strike programs). Would finishing 2013 at, say, 9-3 ranked #13 be rebuilding? I don't think so, so I wouldn't say 2013 looks like a rebuilding year.
Define "rebuilding year."
I think the rankings placing us as a top five team are an instance of irrational exuberance, for the exact reasons you mentioned. But then again I can't see us falling out of the top fifteen in most reasonable scenarios (i.e. no injury/crime waves, major scandals, and various other asteroid-from-nowhere calamities that randomly strike programs). Would finishing 2013 at, say, 9-3 ranked #13 be rebuilding? I don't think so, so I wouldn't say 2013 looks like a rebuilding year.
I think the rankings placing us as a top five team are an instance of irrational exuberance, for the exact reasons you mentioned. But then again I can't see us falling out of the top fifteen in most reasonable scenarios (i.e. no injury/crime waves, major scandals, and various other asteroid-from-nowhere calamities that randomly strike programs). Would finishing 2013 at, say, 9-3 ranked #13 be rebuilding? I don't think so, so I wouldn't say 2013 looks like a rebuilding year.
01-23-2013, 03:25 PM
to pcg:
on RBs, I think the pecking order probably goes Wilkerson, Wright, Seale, then Cummings or Sanders.
on oline, we return 4 starters (Yankey, Wilkes, Danser, Fleming), but I would not be surprised if 2 play new positions (Yankey back to LG; Danser or Wilkes to C) and 2 become part-time starters. a starting line of Peat, Yankey, Danser/Wilkes, Garnett and Murphy could evolve.Â
overall on offense, it will be interesting to see if we develop more variety. many games we became very predictable (not as bad as Bible's "Mitchell off-tackle, Bookman up the middle", but close). it would be nice to run some more counters off of power (bootlegs, naked bootlegs, counter-treys etc) or add more calls (screens, draws, jet-sweeps, etc) to take advantage of unique skillsets like Young or Sanders represent. we saw a bit of this evolution early in the Rose Bowl, but then it quickly disappeared.
all in all though, good problems to have. we lost 8 in our two-deep including specialists.
on RBs, I think the pecking order probably goes Wilkerson, Wright, Seale, then Cummings or Sanders.
on oline, we return 4 starters (Yankey, Wilkes, Danser, Fleming), but I would not be surprised if 2 play new positions (Yankey back to LG; Danser or Wilkes to C) and 2 become part-time starters. a starting line of Peat, Yankey, Danser/Wilkes, Garnett and Murphy could evolve.Â
overall on offense, it will be interesting to see if we develop more variety. many games we became very predictable (not as bad as Bible's "Mitchell off-tackle, Bookman up the middle", but close). it would be nice to run some more counters off of power (bootlegs, naked bootlegs, counter-treys etc) or add more calls (screens, draws, jet-sweeps, etc) to take advantage of unique skillsets like Young or Sanders represent. we saw a bit of this evolution early in the Rose Bowl, but then it quickly disappeared.
all in all though, good problems to have. we lost 8 in our two-deep including specialists.
to pcg:
on RBs, I think the pecking order probably goes Wilkerson, Wright, Seale, then Cummings or Sanders.
on oline, we return 4 starters (Yankey, Wilkes, Danser, Fleming), but I would not be surprised if 2 play new positions (Yankey back to LG; Danser or Wilkes to C) and 2 become part-time starters. a starting line of Peat, Yankey, Danser/Wilkes, Garnett and Murphy could evolve.Â
overall on offense, it will be interesting to see if we develop more variety. many games we became very predictable (not as bad as Bible's "Mitchell off-tackle, Bookman up the middle", but close). it would be nice to run some more counters off of power (bootlegs, naked bootlegs, counter-treys etc) or add more calls (screens, draws, jet-sweeps, etc) to take advantage of unique skillsets like Young or Sanders represent. we saw a bit of this evolution early in the Rose Bowl, but then it quickly disappeared.
all in all though, good problems to have. we lost 8 in our two-deep including specialists.
on RBs, I think the pecking order probably goes Wilkerson, Wright, Seale, then Cummings or Sanders.
on oline, we return 4 starters (Yankey, Wilkes, Danser, Fleming), but I would not be surprised if 2 play new positions (Yankey back to LG; Danser or Wilkes to C) and 2 become part-time starters. a starting line of Peat, Yankey, Danser/Wilkes, Garnett and Murphy could evolve.Â
overall on offense, it will be interesting to see if we develop more variety. many games we became very predictable (not as bad as Bible's "Mitchell off-tackle, Bookman up the middle", but close). it would be nice to run some more counters off of power (bootlegs, naked bootlegs, counter-treys etc) or add more calls (screens, draws, jet-sweeps, etc) to take advantage of unique skillsets like Young or Sanders represent. we saw a bit of this evolution early in the Rose Bowl, but then it quickly disappeared.
all in all though, good problems to have. we lost 8 in our two-deep including specialists.
01-23-2013, 03:39 PM
I suppose it's probably to early to adopt the cliche "we don't rebuild, we reload", but to a very large extent it's true. We have holes, but who doesn't? Is there a single team that doesn't have some pretty large unanswered questions? A&M has line issues, Oregon has coach, defense, and RB questions, LSU is losing some absurd number of starters.
The question isn't "how much are you losing?" but "what are the prospects for replacing it?" Obviously we can't pencil in Hewitt or Kaumatule into Ertz/Toilolo roles, we can't assume that Sanders will emulate his father, and we can't say that Whitfield and Young will turn into stud receivers, but we can look at what we have coming back, look at what our coaches have done in the past in terms of filling these holes, and project based on that. So, obviously, I'm not overly concerned about RB or OL or the defensive holes, and am quite concerned about receivers.
Do I think it's overly optimistic to put us in the preseason top 5? It's certainly optimistic, I don't know about overly though. We'll probably be able to say a lot more after spring practices/games.
Personally, I think that expectations going into this year are much, much higher than they were last year. In July 2012 I would've told you that I'd be happy with an 8-win season with a win in Big Game and keeping the losses competitive. Right now, looking ahead to 2013, that would not be satisfactory.
The question isn't "how much are you losing?" but "what are the prospects for replacing it?" Obviously we can't pencil in Hewitt or Kaumatule into Ertz/Toilolo roles, we can't assume that Sanders will emulate his father, and we can't say that Whitfield and Young will turn into stud receivers, but we can look at what we have coming back, look at what our coaches have done in the past in terms of filling these holes, and project based on that. So, obviously, I'm not overly concerned about RB or OL or the defensive holes, and am quite concerned about receivers.
Do I think it's overly optimistic to put us in the preseason top 5? It's certainly optimistic, I don't know about overly though. We'll probably be able to say a lot more after spring practices/games.
Personally, I think that expectations going into this year are much, much higher than they were last year. In July 2012 I would've told you that I'd be happy with an 8-win season with a win in Big Game and keeping the losses competitive. Right now, looking ahead to 2013, that would not be satisfactory.
I suppose it's probably to early to adopt the cliche "we don't rebuild, we reload", but to a very large extent it's true. We have holes, but who doesn't? Is there a single team that doesn't have some pretty large unanswered questions? A&M has line issues, Oregon has coach, defense, and RB questions, LSU is losing some absurd number of starters.
The question isn't "how much are you losing?" but "what are the prospects for replacing it?" Obviously we can't pencil in Hewitt or Kaumatule into Ertz/Toilolo roles, we can't assume that Sanders will emulate his father, and we can't say that Whitfield and Young will turn into stud receivers, but we can look at what we have coming back, look at what our coaches have done in the past in terms of filling these holes, and project based on that. So, obviously, I'm not overly concerned about RB or OL or the defensive holes, and am quite concerned about receivers.
Do I think it's overly optimistic to put us in the preseason top 5? It's certainly optimistic, I don't know about overly though. We'll probably be able to say a lot more after spring practices/games.
Personally, I think that expectations going into this year are much, much higher than they were last year. In July 2012 I would've told you that I'd be happy with an 8-win season with a win in Big Game and keeping the losses competitive. Right now, looking ahead to 2013, that would not be satisfactory.
The question isn't "how much are you losing?" but "what are the prospects for replacing it?" Obviously we can't pencil in Hewitt or Kaumatule into Ertz/Toilolo roles, we can't assume that Sanders will emulate his father, and we can't say that Whitfield and Young will turn into stud receivers, but we can look at what we have coming back, look at what our coaches have done in the past in terms of filling these holes, and project based on that. So, obviously, I'm not overly concerned about RB or OL or the defensive holes, and am quite concerned about receivers.
Do I think it's overly optimistic to put us in the preseason top 5? It's certainly optimistic, I don't know about overly though. We'll probably be able to say a lot more after spring practices/games.
Personally, I think that expectations going into this year are much, much higher than they were last year. In July 2012 I would've told you that I'd be happy with an 8-win season with a win in Big Game and keeping the losses competitive. Right now, looking ahead to 2013, that would not be satisfactory.
01-23-2013, 04:06 PM
No!
We have heard this every year since Toby's departure (then Harbaugh's departure, then Luck's departure)!  I think next year is our year! IF the team stays healthy we ideally win the North and host the P12 (on a Saturday, thank you).  Defense wins championships and we have a great returning team. I think a top 10 ranking is fair and my hope is that we find the players and the bounces that enable us to get back to Pasadena next year.....a week later...for the National Championship Game against Johnny Football!Â
We have heard this every year since Toby's departure (then Harbaugh's departure, then Luck's departure)!  I think next year is our year! IF the team stays healthy we ideally win the North and host the P12 (on a Saturday, thank you).  Defense wins championships and we have a great returning team. I think a top 10 ranking is fair and my hope is that we find the players and the bounces that enable us to get back to Pasadena next year.....a week later...for the National Championship Game against Johnny Football!Â
No!
We have heard this every year since Toby's departure (then Harbaugh's departure, then Luck's departure)!  I think next year is our year! IF the team stays healthy we ideally win the North and host the P12 (on a Saturday, thank you).  Defense wins championships and we have a great returning team. I think a top 10 ranking is fair and my hope is that we find the players and the bounces that enable us to get back to Pasadena next year.....a week later...for the National Championship Game against Johnny Football!Â
We have heard this every year since Toby's departure (then Harbaugh's departure, then Luck's departure)!  I think next year is our year! IF the team stays healthy we ideally win the North and host the P12 (on a Saturday, thank you).  Defense wins championships and we have a great returning team. I think a top 10 ranking is fair and my hope is that we find the players and the bounces that enable us to get back to Pasadena next year.....a week later...for the National Championship Game against Johnny Football!Â
01-23-2013, 04:26 PM
I doubt A&M is going to escape unscathed in the $EC now that defenses will be ready for him. The Aggies are losing a lot as well.
01-23-2013, 04:42 PM
(01-23-2013, 04:06 PM)Treebound link Wrote:No!
We have heard this every year since Toby's departure (then Harbaugh's departure, then Luck's departure)!  I think next year is our year! IF the team stays healthy we ideally win the North and host the P12 (on a Saturday, thank you).  Defense wins championships and we have a great returning team. I think a top 10 ranking is fair and my hope is that we find the players and the bounces that enable us to get back to Pasadena next year.....a week later...for the National Championship Game against Johnny Football!
This time last year, I thught that the 2012 season was going to be a rebuilding year with 2013 being a phenomenal year, but with all the losses at TE, not having any receiver last year, and Wilkerson not doing nearly as well as in his freshman season, I'm wondering whether this year is going to be the year I expected last year -- a good, but not great team -- and the it's 2014 season that turns into the crazy good, possibly national championship team.
(01-23-2013, 04:06 PM)Treebound link Wrote:No!
We have heard this every year since Toby's departure (then Harbaugh's departure, then Luck's departure)!  I think next year is our year! IF the team stays healthy we ideally win the North and host the P12 (on a Saturday, thank you).  Defense wins championships and we have a great returning team. I think a top 10 ranking is fair and my hope is that we find the players and the bounces that enable us to get back to Pasadena next year.....a week later...for the National Championship Game against Johnny Football!
This time last year, I thught that the 2012 season was going to be a rebuilding year with 2013 being a phenomenal year, but with all the losses at TE, not having any receiver last year, and Wilkerson not doing nearly as well as in his freshman season, I'm wondering whether this year is going to be the year I expected last year -- a good, but not great team -- and the it's 2014 season that turns into the crazy good, possibly national championship team.
01-23-2013, 04:47 PM
The 2013 schedule is definitely set up for success. Some programs have to be put into the top 10. Some of those programs won't finish the year in the top 10. If one looks at the other teams that finished in the top 10, Stanford is at least as worthy to be put into the pre-season top 5 as any other program not named 'Bama.
The 2013 schedule is definitely set up for success. Some programs have to be put into the top 10. Some of those programs won't finish the year in the top 10. If one looks at the other teams that finished in the top 10, Stanford is at least as worthy to be put into the pre-season top 5 as any other program not named 'Bama.
01-23-2013, 05:02 PM
(01-23-2013, 04:45 PM)garvin link Wrote:I think I'm the only one who wonders if we might have another change at quarterback next year. Kevin Hogan did a good job for us over the final five games, especially compared to the performance we were getting at quarterback before he took over. But he wasn't Superman. It seems to me there's room for a challenge from Dallas Lloyd, if Lloyd is really the quarterback he was cracked up to be when we recruited him.
I think Hogan's pretty safe unless Lloyd is Superman. He performed quite well for:
a) a redshirt freshmen
b) with so-so at best wide receivers
c) who played four straight ranked opponents
d) whose opponents were mostly on the road (two home games, three away games, one neutral site)
There's probably some recency bias here -- we remember the Rose Bowl. He did struggle against Wisconsin, but I think it's mitigated by two things: one, it was his first real stinker of a game; two, Wisconsin, while possessing a mediocre overall record, actually had a very good defense -- they surrendered under 20 ppg and under 5 yards per play. That's pretty good.
I also can't stress enough the "opponents" factor. Comparing Hogan to any other college QB statistically is highly difficult -- I would guess he was #1 easily in strength of schedule.
What makes me feel most positively about Hogan are his statistics with two TEs on the field. Luck in 2011 averaged 9.7 yards per attempt; Hogan, 9.2. To me, that indicates that when Hogan has good talent surrounding him, he can be more than good enough.
EDIT: that said, it's not as if we have a sure thing on our hands with Hogan. That was Andrew Luck. Hogan's merely a pretty good bet.
Also see: http://www.ruleoftree.com/2012/12/27/380...quite-good
(01-23-2013, 04:45 PM)garvin link Wrote:I think I'm the only one who wonders if we might have another change at quarterback next year. Kevin Hogan did a good job for us over the final five games, especially compared to the performance we were getting at quarterback before he took over. But he wasn't Superman. It seems to me there's room for a challenge from Dallas Lloyd, if Lloyd is really the quarterback he was cracked up to be when we recruited him.
I think Hogan's pretty safe unless Lloyd is Superman. He performed quite well for:
a) a redshirt freshmen
b) with so-so at best wide receivers
c) who played four straight ranked opponents
d) whose opponents were mostly on the road (two home games, three away games, one neutral site)
There's probably some recency bias here -- we remember the Rose Bowl. He did struggle against Wisconsin, but I think it's mitigated by two things: one, it was his first real stinker of a game; two, Wisconsin, while possessing a mediocre overall record, actually had a very good defense -- they surrendered under 20 ppg and under 5 yards per play. That's pretty good.
I also can't stress enough the "opponents" factor. Comparing Hogan to any other college QB statistically is highly difficult -- I would guess he was #1 easily in strength of schedule.
What makes me feel most positively about Hogan are his statistics with two TEs on the field. Luck in 2011 averaged 9.7 yards per attempt; Hogan, 9.2. To me, that indicates that when Hogan has good talent surrounding him, he can be more than good enough.
EDIT: that said, it's not as if we have a sure thing on our hands with Hogan. That was Andrew Luck. Hogan's merely a pretty good bet.
Also see: http://www.ruleoftree.com/2012/12/27/380...quite-good
01-23-2013, 05:15 PM
no way Lloyd beats out Hogan next season. Hogan looked great and will get better. I never heard anything good about how Lloyd played in practice. He may be better than Crower but it would be shocking if all of a sudden he was competing with Hogan to start at QB.
01-23-2013, 05:40 PM
(01-23-2013, 05:20 PM)Oasis link Wrote: I believe the Cardboard is returning all its key posters.
We may be losing our All American WO (Wild Optimist) Rando. Haven't seen him around lately -- anybody know if he's turned pro or something.
01-23-2013, 05:49 PM
I think it will depend on the OL. Our OL this year wasn't as good as in the past couple of years, and I'm not seduced by the return of four starters. But if key young, highly talented OL mature quickly to the point of being able to get a better surge on the line than we had this past year, then our running game will be good enough to help compensate for our deficiencies at WR and inexperience (next year) at TE.
More specifically, Peat played in the Rose Bowl, including the fourth quarter, particularly on running plays. If he can get his pass blocking to the point where the coaches trust him to protect Hogan's blindside, he could slide in at LT and Yankey can move to LG. Throw in Garnett, all 325 pounds of him at RG. Maybe even Schuler at center, although I don't know if he has progressed enough to call the blocking schemes.
If our OL is better, our RBs are talented enough. This will buy time for the WRs and TEs to develop, and we certainly have enough recent WRs recruits on the roster. I'm not sure whether our problem with WRs is due to coaching or scheme, but a good OL and running game will help them, as all they will then need to be is decent or average.
More specifically, Peat played in the Rose Bowl, including the fourth quarter, particularly on running plays. If he can get his pass blocking to the point where the coaches trust him to protect Hogan's blindside, he could slide in at LT and Yankey can move to LG. Throw in Garnett, all 325 pounds of him at RG. Maybe even Schuler at center, although I don't know if he has progressed enough to call the blocking schemes.
If our OL is better, our RBs are talented enough. This will buy time for the WRs and TEs to develop, and we certainly have enough recent WRs recruits on the roster. I'm not sure whether our problem with WRs is due to coaching or scheme, but a good OL and running game will help them, as all they will then need to be is decent or average.
I think it will depend on the OL. Our OL this year wasn't as good as in the past couple of years, and I'm not seduced by the return of four starters. But if key young, highly talented OL mature quickly to the point of being able to get a better surge on the line than we had this past year, then our running game will be good enough to help compensate for our deficiencies at WR and inexperience (next year) at TE.
More specifically, Peat played in the Rose Bowl, including the fourth quarter, particularly on running plays. If he can get his pass blocking to the point where the coaches trust him to protect Hogan's blindside, he could slide in at LT and Yankey can move to LG. Throw in Garnett, all 325 pounds of him at RG. Maybe even Schuler at center, although I don't know if he has progressed enough to call the blocking schemes.
If our OL is better, our RBs are talented enough. This will buy time for the WRs and TEs to develop, and we certainly have enough recent WRs recruits on the roster. I'm not sure whether our problem with WRs is due to coaching or scheme, but a good OL and running game will help them, as all they will then need to be is decent or average.
More specifically, Peat played in the Rose Bowl, including the fourth quarter, particularly on running plays. If he can get his pass blocking to the point where the coaches trust him to protect Hogan's blindside, he could slide in at LT and Yankey can move to LG. Throw in Garnett, all 325 pounds of him at RG. Maybe even Schuler at center, although I don't know if he has progressed enough to call the blocking schemes.
If our OL is better, our RBs are talented enough. This will buy time for the WRs and TEs to develop, and we certainly have enough recent WRs recruits on the roster. I'm not sure whether our problem with WRs is due to coaching or scheme, but a good OL and running game will help them, as all they will then need to be is decent or average.
01-23-2013, 06:26 PM
(01-23-2013, 05:40 PM)somnambule link Wrote:[quote author=Oasis link=topic=7443.msg57755#msg57755 date=1358986854]
I believe the Cardboard is returning all its key posters.
We may be losing our All American WO (Wild Optimist) Rando. Haven't seen him around lately -- anybody know if he's turned pro or something.
[/quote]
I've been wondering about that myself. I just checked the logs and he or she (have we established that it's a he?) hasn't been on since Jan. 7.
He or she certainly brought a new attitude to the board!
(01-23-2013, 05:40 PM)somnambule link Wrote:[quote author=Oasis link=topic=7443.msg57755#msg57755 date=1358986854]
I believe the Cardboard is returning all its key posters.
We may be losing our All American WO (Wild Optimist) Rando. Haven't seen him around lately -- anybody know if he's turned pro or something.
[/quote]
I've been wondering about that myself. I just checked the logs and he or she (have we established that it's a he?) hasn't been on since Jan. 7.
He or she certainly brought a new attitude to the board!
01-23-2013, 07:39 PM
I agree a lot comes down to the OL. What I love about that situation is the depth we have, and the apparent ability of the coaches to accurately evaluate and develop that talent. I hope Peat works out at the LT position, but if he doesn't for some reason, it is good to have Kyle Murphy also in the mix, as well as Davidson and of course Yankey. Best scenario is one of the young guys develops at tackle so Yankey can move back to guard. But personally I'm pretty optimistic that this unit will move improve and allow the offense to control the clock, grind down defenses, etc. You know, play Shaw's style of physical football. (God, I love typing that).
I agree a lot comes down to the OL. What I love about that situation is the depth we have, and the apparent ability of the coaches to accurately evaluate and develop that talent. I hope Peat works out at the LT position, but if he doesn't for some reason, it is good to have Kyle Murphy also in the mix, as well as Davidson and of course Yankey. Best scenario is one of the young guys develops at tackle so Yankey can move back to guard. But personally I'm pretty optimistic that this unit will move improve and allow the offense to control the clock, grind down defenses, etc. You know, play Shaw's style of physical football. (God, I love typing that).
01-23-2013, 08:28 PM
(01-23-2013, 04:45 PM)garvin link Wrote:I think I'm the only one who wonders if we might have another change at quarterback next year. Kevin Hogan did a good job for us over the final five games, especially compared to the performance we were getting at quarterback before he took over. But he wasn't Superman. It seems to me there's room for a challenge from Dallas Lloyd, if Lloyd is really the quarterback he was cracked up to be when we recruited him.
Superman's a wuss. Batman (who has no super powers) has kicked his ass every time they've had to tussle. This is why Superman has called Batman: "the most dangerous man on earth." (And not coincidentally this is why Batman has kicked Superman's ass at the box office).
Dallas Lloyd and Kevin Hogan were rated similarly by the recruiting sites. All we know of Lloyd is hype. Hogan has proven himself on the field. As a Frosh. I hope Lloyd is as good as the hype. Hogan will need a successor after he declares for the draft. I also hope Lloyd takes the field this coming season. As a receiver.
(01-23-2013, 04:45 PM)garvin link Wrote:I think I'm the only one who wonders if we might have another change at quarterback next year. Kevin Hogan did a good job for us over the final five games, especially compared to the performance we were getting at quarterback before he took over. But he wasn't Superman. It seems to me there's room for a challenge from Dallas Lloyd, if Lloyd is really the quarterback he was cracked up to be when we recruited him.
Superman's a wuss. Batman (who has no super powers) has kicked his ass every time they've had to tussle. This is why Superman has called Batman: "the most dangerous man on earth." (And not coincidentally this is why Batman has kicked Superman's ass at the box office).
Dallas Lloyd and Kevin Hogan were rated similarly by the recruiting sites. All we know of Lloyd is hype. Hogan has proven himself on the field. As a Frosh. I hope Lloyd is as good as the hype. Hogan will need a successor after he declares for the draft. I also hope Lloyd takes the field this coming season. As a receiver.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »