Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

College Bowl Games


jayboogieman
 Share

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Bear Hands said:

Clayton Tune looked pretty solid tonight.  He’s going to have teams peeking interest. I see him, Haener and O’Connell rising on boards from here on out.

Haener is solid, but looks a little undersized and already has an injury history now. I’m interested in O’Connell and need to do some research on him. He is interesting, because he his team was probably outmatched from a talent standpoint vs other Big10 schools and he is still getting some attention.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ForJimmy said:

Haener is solid, but looks a little undersized and already has an injury history now. I’m interested in O’Connell and need to do some research on him. He is interesting, because he his team was probably outmatched from a talent standpoint vs other Big10 schools and he is still getting some attention.

Haener & O'Connell probably lead the class behind Bryce in the competitive toughness category but Haener no doubt needs to fill out his frame.    

Comparing the two, both have a ton to like but their arms and athleticism hold them back.  Haener has the edge over Aidanin both those depts, but Aidan has been a proven record coming back and having GWDs against top competition.  He stands tall and really sees the middle of the field well.  David Bell at WR helped but still, he's shown a lot.

Buut I just love Haener's vibe on the field--pocket feel, accuracy and placement.  That was a different team all together when he was out.  Fresno State's offense wasn't some machine that kept running without him.  But 6'1 195ish, you need some Young level intangibles to be considered R1-2.  

Both strike me as 3rd-6th rounders that could become a starter for the right team down the road.  Kind of the Cousins path.  

I just look at them compared to a Duggan, Hall, Hooker, or Rattler and they're just so much better refined as a passer and really live in that QB mindset.

Tune has even more traits than those two and the Senior Bowl could catapult him.  Time will tell on that front but he's the one to watch that could sniff QB4, more than likely QB5 in this class.  I can see teams buying in on him over any of these guys mentioned once Richardson is off the board.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Sure it does, maybe not every position and not every draft.  You have to admit the hit rate goes down the further in the draft you get.  Would you more readily find a generational talent at the #2 pick or #19 pick?  High picks are considered "busts" if they doesn't pan out, whereas guys drafted later don't have that level of scrutiny upon them.  Different expectation levels.  If Styles does indeed go #2, I already listed the rarefied air that he would be in.  Maybe he doesn't set the League on fire, but my gut feeling is he does.  Again, you don't take an off-ball LB #2 if he is just a 'really good' player.
    • To illustrate my point, I watched (and commented on the Huddle) that Rozeboom would often wait a full second (or close to it) before taking his first step.  I assume that he probably had issues with false steps, a faulty practice that can take an ILB out of the gap completely.  Watch Luke and you see a step with the snap, and rarely was it a false step.  Rozeboom may have had 100 tackles (speculating) but initial contact was 2-3 yards on the defensive side of the ball.  Luke's 100 tackles were made 1-2 yards from the LOS.  Over the course of a year, Luke was much more productive (more fumbles, fewer long gainers, more OL penalties, fewer first downs, etc) that Rozeboom, but on the stat sheet, they both had 100 tackles.  In fact, Rozeboom's inefficiency kept him on the field more (more first downs, fewer OL penalties, turnovers, and punts) so he should have MORE tackles.   I would like to see stats that break down those things.   For example again, Josh Norman was slow--4.68 or so at CB.  However, his anticipation speed was incredible.  He made as many plays as a 4.4 CB.  I had one coach (college--later became the head coach at WCU) tell me that slower players have to use their brains more to still be around.  Elite athletes can just get by on their physical superiority.  He added, "Rarely does a football player run full speed.  Most of the time, they are not, so the 40 time is misleading stat.  Smart players overcome shortcomings--when the elite athlete becomes average (slows with age, advances in level of competition) they struggle against smarter (football IQ) competition.  
    • Obviously tongue in cheek hyperbole. But we do not need a first round RB to compete for a championship. We need intelligent roster building. That to me is the complete opposite of intelligent roster building because it is a prime resource at a devalued plug and play position when we have needs across the defense.
×
×
  • Create New...