February 3, 2016 at 11:55 pm #25203
Composite highlight video is now up:February 3, 2016 at 11:58 pm #25204
Not nearly as good as last year. Dislointed sloppy production.February 4, 2016 at 12:06 am #25205
I’m not sure that this is the norm. It really should be around 20-23. The low # is likely due to the overly large class last year.
If my math is correct 17 X 4=68. Consider that you will lose some during those 4 years too.February 4, 2016 at 12:16 am #25206
Not the norm, I agree. From what I undetstand our issue is availibility of schollie money. K. Smith retired from football and B.Smith suspended. Not sure their money was available this year. Plus, we have 2 need aid 5th year players.February 4, 2016 at 12:58 am #25207
still, roster only gonna be around 82, that is not many bodies, hope injuries do not mount upFebruary 4, 2016 at 1:02 am #25208
Several really impressive kids. A couple of guys seem like they’re out of position, but great athletes.
Mobley looks like an absolute beast. Can’t wait to see him play. Seighman and Wilson look like stud DBs.
Some other good linemen; couple of good offensive skill players.
That said, hard to count chickens after seeing the team play the past few years. Too many things change. I guess they’re sticking with a rover.
I hope there are a few more, too.February 4, 2016 at 1:04 am #25209
Guess some more WOs for August.82 is dangerously low. But, would not be surprised if we got 4 of our Magnificent 7 back.. From what ngineersaid 2 were no longer in school. Interesting to see how Andy treats thid.
February 4, 2016 at 1:46 am #25211
- This reply was modified 4 years, 8 months ago by RichH.
Nick Rosen is the son of LU DT Dave Rosen. He took us over Nova.February 4, 2016 at 2:22 am #25213
[quote=25199]Is anyone else going to the banquet on Sunday?
Any questions people want asked without getting me blacklisted?
Yes..from what I saw posted in one of the releases, it appears we are locked in to still using the 3-3-5—WHY??!!!February 4, 2016 at 2:46 am #25215
My thought exactly but when I saw the makeup of this recruiting class, I knew it was coming.February 4, 2016 at 2:58 am #25216
Which makes it very unlikely there will be no staff changes.
So the question is whether staying the course is just insanely doing the same thing and expecting a different result or it is the just the necessary process for staff and players to impr ove. I have no idea which it is. Given Andy’s choice, I hope it is the latter.February 4, 2016 at 3:39 am #25217
WR’s are not tall
LB situation a real ? – small and only 2
Only 2 DL albeit good ones
OL very good and a handful of strong players in other positions.
DL/LB situation will continue to be problematic and that should have been fixed with this class. It was not.February 4, 2016 at 3:51 am #25218
After two horrendous years we needed to make scheme and or coaching changes on defense. The fact that we didn’t make either is incredibly disappointing. As RichH and Einstein once said “doing the same thing and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity”.February 4, 2016 at 3:52 am #25219
WRs are slots. Height not important as much as speed and hands. Gamble has that in abundance.
Not sure what your issue is with LBs. We have a lot of them including a pile of A-S guys in the ladt 2 classes. Other than a stud NG ee have good players available at all spots. The problem to me is the scheme. Neither staff nor players had ever played in it before. Compound that with the injuries at Rover and SS and you have too many inexperienced kuds and coaches trytding to run a D. A dismal failure. Is keeping it all in place the best solution?February 4, 2016 at 4:08 am #25220
as to LB’s, there are 2 So, 2 Jr and 4 Sr on the 2016 roster, so the following year that leaves only 6 on the roster + next year recruits, sure hope the young guys pan out and nobody gets hurt, but if the roster is only gonna be 82, guess having more than 8 LBs is too much of a luxury?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.