February 4, 2016 at 4:31 am #25221
A lot depends on what Andy does with suspended kids. Walker at LB likely back. That is 9 for 3 spots. Rover also is 3 deep. In this era that is a lot of depth. We are not going to see 110 players on roster like in the Small era. That year we carried 31 OL on the roster. Every squad in the PL is going to have the same issues.
February 4, 2016 at 4:58 am #25223
- This reply was modified 4 years, 8 months ago by RichH.
Go Lehigh TU OwlParticipant
[quote=25219]WRs are slots. Height not important as much as speed and hands. Gamble has that in abundance.
I posted the other night that I really wanted the staff to focus on the slot position. I think these two guys are exactly what the offense needed given what TP and Casey bring out wide. Gamble and Connolly have the potential to be nightmare matchups which is what you want from your slot guys. Fordham’s passing offense two years ago ran through Wetzel. That guy was the Edelman of the PL…February 4, 2016 at 8:54 am #25225
Need two more at 220 pounds+. We have been struggled badly because of scheme and size/strength on defense. Again, this class needed at least two more guys to stop the run – including at LB where four will be seniors next season.February 4, 2016 at 12:59 pm #25226
The seeming lack of staff changes and scheme is ridiculous. No known effort to reinvigorate the home stadium experience. Oh, well. Enjoy it!February 4, 2016 at 1:39 pm #25227
No real insight here, I’m a 2nd-rate football mind – but I’ll play devil’s advocate on this:
Is it reasonable to give up on the scheme after 2 seasons? As others have pointed out, it was new to everyone involved. Additionally, before last year, no D players were recruited to play the 3-3-5 scheme. I’m guessing that the scheme would influence your recruiting decisions. I’m confident that nobody was recruited to play rover, for example. If we’re now recruiting for that scheme, does that change the picture?
I also wonder if the choice of scheme might reflect recruiting opportunities. If we know that we struggle to get x type of player, might you choose a scheme that relies less on x?February 4, 2016 at 2:20 pm #25228
Getting players for a scheme is not as relevant as thought here, the teaching of it and game plan is, and that rests squarely on the D coaching staff that seems to have survived last year. Tackling, covering, making plays. It’s not ‘we only have one rover’ garbage, it’s a SS by another name. That’s all. No magic. 3 DL instead of four. Three LBs (undersized in our case) and five DBs. You have to control the gaps u can, the zones in secondary you can, solid ,am coverage when us gamble and blitz..the ‘haven’t played it before’ idea for the players is dumb, it’s football. How one mixes that up, scheme, is all coaching. And it appears intact.
That said, the OL guys seem to have size, and we’ll coach them up no doubt. We, slot guys or not, seem small, not much frame to grow into. With roster limits and injuries, would hope for more durable guys sizewise w scholarships. Maybe a TE or OL guy can be a DL guy, I think a little more beef here helps always.
Question for the board…Craven, Timo, Mayes, Shaf, now Monaco. Five guys on roster at QB. 12% of your scholarship roster at one position, one that only one guy can play. I think it too many, especially if all are full ticket guys. Kinda like five punters, right? Maybe crav and Timo are not full schoollie guys, they were not recruited heavily at all. If they are, we are rationing out rides poorly. Four is enough, then u get one next cycle. Thoughts?February 4, 2016 at 2:51 pm #25230
agree with Doc on QBs, also 7 TEs?
thought Craven might have been a walk onFebruary 4, 2016 at 3:01 pm #25231
by the way, looks like all the verbals indeed did sign and Lomax was the only one signed not on our verbal list
so when might we hear about additional roster fillers, 5th year approvals, transfers, or walk ons?February 4, 2016 at 3:10 pm #25233
Agree with Doc. After 31 ladt year , a small class this year not surprising. Wish we could have gotten a few more, a P and NG come to mind
Unlikely Timo and Craven are anyting more than partials. Anothrr QB? A puzzle as I think we have higher needs elsewhere. Another TE? Puhl worth it IMO. He is that good. Perhaps Folmar will start actually using his TEs.
D recruits? Really have no problem with the oones we got. DL guys are studs. They will be on the field quickly. Weir and Woetzel are both a step up from what we have. Weir has size and speed ( he is a sprinter on the track team),
Oh, should mention that I forgot Scott at OLB.
Repeat I dont think it is a lack of talent in our D. Coaching is the key.February 4, 2016 at 3:21 pm #25234
Scott?February 4, 2016 at 3:22 pm #25235
We should know 5th years by Spring practice. WOs by Aug. Transfrrs? If alreay enrolled by Spring. If coming in Sept earliest would be Aug but more likely the next Spring.February 4, 2016 at 3:50 pm #25236
looks like all the verbals indeed did sign…
Anybody know what became of Tugman or Hassan? I thought we’d heard reports of verbals from both? The @Avery_tuggie twitter account still says LU football commit. A prankster, maybe?February 4, 2016 at 3:57 pm #25237
Jake Scott fr OLB. One of our Magnificent 7. He and Walker back at some point. Both going for accelerated disposition for 1st time offenders. Dont know yet what Andy will impose.February 4, 2016 at 4:37 pm #25238
Very good article this morning from Grollrt”s interview with Andy. Andy notrd that we are still looking to add 3 WOs to this class. A bit more specific about our needs and recruiting.February 4, 2016 at 4:47 pm #25239
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.