the credit should go to the PLAYERS. as should the majority of the blame when big plays are given up. many different coaches win and lose with many different schemes. in the end, its upto the players to make plays.
it'll be interesting to watch and see if lee has an a.j. hawk type of rise up the depth chart or if maybe this is one of those times when a coach puts a guy in the starting spot early to give him some confidence. while at the same time, motivating another player to step up his game (trey Johnson?).
today's "new" offenses like urban, chip and malzahn run are basically offenses that were ran when football was in its early stages. the passing game took over for a long time and now these run based offenses are seen as new. the triple option of ga. tech is an old school offense but its extremely similar to what malzahn runs. the only difference is that he stole it from a book called I believe the Delaware wing-T and still gets credit for being an offensive guru.
well said tussey.....well said indeed
while the 40 isn't practical for every position such as o-line. de/olb'ers have been greatly effected by what their 40 time is. rb/fb's have been effected as well. so its not going away anytime soon. other positions are effected as well. it makes a lot of guys a lot of money.
if this happened to bama, saban would throw the biggest temper tantrum cfb has ever seen.
I think we'll be fine tho.
bama's season is in the hands of coker or as i call him, mettenberger jr. i dont see it going real well for bama unless they run the crap out of the ball like they should've done this year but didnt.
theres no denying bama's stats as far as wins, etc. so u can put them up there each time and pretty much not say anything else and u would look right on the money. however, i lean more towards the idea of how did they get them wins and nc's etc. not just the end result and done. take out games against lsu alone and the wins and even an NC drops significantly. if they played lsu last game of season like we do scUM and it would be a lil different. texas/oklahoma's rivalry is lessened for the same reason in my mind. i know that bama and lsu isnt the same kind of rivalry but the schedule makers dont seem to be in a hurry to make that game later in the season for some reason when the stakes could be even higher.
if you take away the star designation of recruits, fans would have very little choice but to trust that the coaches know what they're doing. so how about we just do that anyway?
jpfbuck, jm curious about how many of bama's "big" games were against a top 10 ranked sec team EARLY in the season who ended up ranked well below the top 10 at the end of the season? my reasoning is based on how they line up early season conference games knowing that the winner will get a big ranking boost and the loser has time to work their way back up later on. everything the sec does has a plan behind it. its not coincidental. not saying its illegal or anything. its actually very good thinking and the big10 should follow suit but we cant because on average, 6 of the top 10 teams are sec. that's pretty convenient huh?
u bring in the amount u can fit. a couple over is a calculated risk. 5 or more is a PLAN.
there are lots of 4/5 star players that are given that designation due to their potential not their readiness to help right away. thats a much forgotten factoid.
you got rid of possibly 5 players thru "possible" graduation (like they just decided to graduate and walk away from football on their own). qb transfer(maybe has to do with bringing in so many it pushes 1 or 2 out). one has been at odds with saban so he might leave(which means he's mad at saban for pushing him out the door). you then write them off like they were never there and say bama is only over the limit by 2! i predict some very hard conditioning tests for those 2 in the near future.....
im confused.....should we celebrate his great time or talk about how speed doesn't matter like in the hyde thread? : /
the opening has been around 2 maybe 3 years. my thoughts go back way beyond that.
I am totally on board with the thinking that the numbers don't define a player but if we just dismiss ALL of the combine testing what are we left with? just game film. hyde's game film is great stuff and I believe he will be a good nfl rb but the draft process is a necessary evil that helps sort out the best of the best.
we cant put up these overblown numbers don't matter articles to define a bad combine showing knowing full well that if hyde had blown up the combine with great numbers we'd be using that as a reason he should be drafted high. I hate to say it but this sounds very ttun'ish.
ive mentioned before that if you write down current recruits "supposed" times now and compare them to when they get timed at the combine, more times than not the guy somehow gets slower and shorter. reported 4.3 in high school usually turns out to be 4.55 at the combine. year after year......
1st off I love el guapo as a player. having said that, he's at best a mid 4.5 guy in the 40 which is still a great time for his size and build.
as for ur reasoning; I think ur reaching and that's being kind. its been well documented over the years that hand times are almost always faster than electronic times. ur right that most teams if not all of them prefer to go with what their scouts hand times say they ran and who knows? maybe they are more accurate but if hyde had ran an ET of 4.4 we wouldn't be disputing it. so this sounds like sour grapes tbh.
plus, my eyes tell me he didn't pull up or even show a limp til about 5 yards after the finish line. im sure his pro day time will be better but aren't they ALWAYS better?
I tend to respect everyones opinion until it comes to the use of "gateway drug". just about everything has a beginning stage and escalation and therefore can be somehow linked to other things. linking marijuana use to other drugs is like linking masturbation to rape. im sure a lot of rapists masturbated at some point so it must lead to rape right? yes that means everyone on here is a future rapist even including johnny-shane........
sack numbers can be deceiving. like some have said, at times they come in bunches and then disappear.
not positive, but I wouldn't be surprised if the #'s showed that teams dropped back and tried to throw against this defense more often than the others. which could lead to more sack opportunities.
roby's size and skill set is a fit for most teams. so I see him going late 1 to mid 2nd rd. shazier will be looked at by teams running a 4-3 and looking for a weakside olb. unless a team falls in love, he looks like a 2nd rd guy. hyde fits a lot of teams but not all and rb's usually go 2-3rd rd.
kirk just visited usc on Saturday with his family. no word on how it went tho.
qb's dont usually wait as long as other positions due to #'s. id be surprised if we dont have a qb verbal by june-july.
id gladly agree with you except for the talk about Wilson being "moved". whats he being moved from? maybe once we see how Samuel gets used in the spring it'll be more clear. seems like these guys are built more like rb's than wr tho. 5'9-510 and 175-190lbs. no matter tho, I still like them as athletes. just curious about their roles.
great highlights and great talent but im confused. Samuel and kirk seem like better fits than Wilson in the so-called "harvin role" yet Wilson is supposed to be moved to more of a wr role and Samuel is by all accounts talked about as a wr and now kirk says he'll be used like brown at wr. imo, harvin was as much a rb as a wr if not more so. so what am I missing?