Custis

ScionOfSouthland said:
Laskey plays hard-nosed, north-south football. If he has any flaws, it is that he is a bruiser and isn't afraid of contact.
Click to expand...

Not that great a blocker, I think. But he has shown the ability to catch the ball out of the backfield, and that will mean a lot to pro teams, if he gets a chance.
 
hiveredtech said:
Thats a bit dramatic I think.

Laskey will start as a Senior unless his blocking continues to stay stagnant and Custis picks it up quickly.

There has never been anything wrong with laskey's production running the ball...excellent YPC and gets downhill quickly.
Click to expand...


It's not so much a knock on Laskey as it is a reality check on what Custis needs to be. Coaches made the decision to go all-in on Custis as the BB of the future. There is no backup plan. Therefore, I expect great things.

And I think the better move is Laskey at AB anyway with Custis and Conners at BB. Laskey is good in space and catches the ball well. Yeah, his blocking is suspect, but we've had good runners/bad blockers at AB before that worked out well.
 
originalwombat said:
Coaches made the decision to go all-in on Custis as the BB of the future. There is no backup plan.
Click to expand...
Still being overly dramatic. We are recruiting other BBs to come along with Custis, and we will continue. Shai McKenzie for example.
 
cyptomcat said:
Still being overly dramatic. We are recruiting other BBs to come along with Custis, and we will continue. Shai McKenzie for example.
Click to expand...
Agreed cypto....the coaches did not go without a back-up plan to Custis.

With Sims graduating, the coaches will likely move Donovan Wilson to his more natural position at BB. There has always the possibility of moving Marcus Allen back

I really think Matt Conners does not come back for his 5th year...we will know soon.

Next year looks like:
Zach Laskey (Sr)
Travis Custis (Fr)
Broderick Snoddy (Jr-R)
Donovan Wilson (Fr-R)
 
I know this is a BB discussion but i would love it if Paul got a TE or two in here as the playside AB to help have a big body over the middle in the passing game, help powerset blocking run playaction off the same power set and dump it to the TE in the flat. There is something to be said about the impact of a big body in the pass game.

Also you can sell this to a TE because doing this out of the AB spot is no different than an offset TE in the nfl or a HB type te we see in the nfl.

I just think it would help the playbook so much. On goalline. Short yardage. Pass blocking. Etc.
 
GTCrew4b said:
you mean like this guy: http://georgiatech.scout.com/a.z?s=140&p=8&c=1&nid=6888347

I think he even said they talked to him about H-Back.
Click to expand...

the problem is i was told he was penciled in at OT....(or DE can't remember)

but it was not to play a hybrid AB etc....

IMO, if he was to be a TE or HB in our system and we are moving that way...then we need to bring on more than 1 this year. So this is why I believe he is actually for OT and that is accurate
 
Custis will be a nice solid backup next year to Laskey. The real question is what to do with Snoddy?
 
originalwombat said:
If Custis can't pass Laskey on the depth chart, then we have officially whiffed on Custis.
Click to expand...

:lol:

How exactley does one whiff on a 3* recruit? I mean he's a 3* recruit, he's either gonna be mediocre or he gonna suprise some people and develop into a star. Or he could get hurt and be nothing.

And considering the amount of scholly's continuosly left on the table by this coaching staff, I would say its impossible to "whiff" on any recruit considering we had openings.
 
33jacket said:
I know this is a BB discussion but i would love it if Paul got a TE or two in here as the playside AB to help have a big body over the middle in the passing game, help powerset blocking run playaction off the same power set and dump it to the TE in the flat. There is something to be said about the impact of a big body in the pass game.

Also you can sell this to a TE because doing this out of the AB spot is no different than an offset TE in the nfl or a HB type te we see in the nfl.

I just think it would help the playbook so much. On goalline. Short yardage. Pass blocking. Etc.
Click to expand...

I like the idea of double tightends with a-backs lined up outside of them for short yardage option play or play action pass.
 
33jacket said:
I know this is a BB discussion but i would love it if Paul got a TE or two in here as the playside AB to help have a big body over the middle in the passing game, help powerset blocking run playaction off the same power set and dump it to the TE in the flat. There is something to be said about the impact of a big body in the pass game.

Also you can sell this to a TE because doing this out of the AB spot is no different than an offset TE in the nfl or a HB type te we see in the nfl.

I just think it would help the playbook so much. On goalline. Short yardage. Pass blocking. Etc.
Click to expand...

Agree here. Weren't we trying to sway the Howard kid from Bama promising to utilize him in a manner similar to what you suggest?
 
etc79 said:
:lol:

How exactley does one whiff on a 3* recruit? I mean he's a 3* recruit, he's either gonna be mediocre or he gonna suprise some people and develop into a star. Or he could get hurt and be nothing.

And considering the amount of scholly's continuosly left on the table by this coaching staff, I would say its impossible to "whiff" on any recruit considering we had openings.
Click to expand...

You know they keep a schollie or two in their back pocket each year for a possible transfer or to reward a walk-on, like Godhigh.
 
swampsting said:
You know they keep a schollie or two in their back pocket each year for a possible transfer or to reward a walk-on, like Godhigh.
Click to expand...

Smart of them....the Sabans of the world should take notice to the genious going on over here.
 
etc79 said:
:lol:

How exactley does one whiff on a 3* recruit? I mean he's a 3* recruit, he's either gonna be mediocre or he gonna suprise some people and develop into a star. Or he could get hurt and be nothing.

And considering the amount of scholly's continuosly left on the table by this coaching staff, I would say its impossible to "whiff" on any recruit considering we had openings.
Click to expand...

4 star-Scout
 
KG01 said:
Agree here. Weren't we trying to sway the Howard kid from Bama promising to utilize him in a manner similar to what you suggest?
Click to expand...

I have no clue, don't follow recruiting that closely

but the deal is we will never sway anyone here from any school at TE (as a first time experiment) until we start showing this on film. In other words, we need to take a guy in another position and put him here to do this, and do it a bunch, or recruit a kid who is a tweener OT/TE and put him at TE, or recruit a TE who is totally unheralded and willing to go to GT for this opportunity.

Bottom line is we better build up the reputation of the scheme if we want to do this. Maybe this klock guy can start that...who knows
 
Against UGa we lined up in an unsymmetrical OL with Smelter in the tackle spot. Why we didn't put Waller in that spot instead, I don't know. Seems like that is film you could show a TE.

We had two tackles and a guard on the left side. Smelter was on the right. We used that formation at least 3 times.
 
WracerX said:
Against UGa we lined up in an unsymmetrical OL with Smelter in the tackle spot. Why we didn't put Waller in that spot instead, I don't know. Seems like that is film you could show a TE.

We had two tackles and a guard on the left side. Smelter was on the right. We used that formation at least 3 times.
Click to expand...

I feel if CPJ would at least do this(vary formations) more often, then he would appease a lot of the people that are disenchanted with him. I feel that he is getting the perception that he is completely one dimensional and unwilling to change. I am uncertain at this point how true that is but I do know that if he utilized a "heavy" package with an extra tackle and/or a TE people would see that he does vary from straight TO.
 
WracerX said:
Against UGa we lined up in an unsymmetrical OL with Smelter in the tackle spot. Why we didn't put Waller in that spot instead, I don't know. Seems like that is film you could show a TE.

We had two tackles and a guard on the left side. Smelter was on the right. We used that formation at least 3 times.
Click to expand...

yes we did but that is an unbalanced set. You don't run that but in situational packages and that alone is not enough to sway a TE here

We need to show it out of base...base and base personnel = many more situations and reps. And oh BTW gives the D another thing to think about....Need to show it out of base, show seam passes, chip block and roll to the flat routes etc...like a real TE. Our O is actually set up beautifully for a TE if Paul would just get that on the team. Ask any QB and they will tell you they love a good run game and a big 6-6" TE to throw over the middle to or in the redzone....
 
33jacket said:
yes we did but that is an unbalanced set. You don't run that but in situational packages and that alone is not enough to sway a TE here

We need to show it out of base...base and base personnel = many more situations and reps. And oh BTW gives the D another thing to think about....Need to show it out of base, show seam passes, chip block and roll to the flat routes etc...like a real TE. Our O is actually set up beautifully for a TE if Paul would just get that on the team. Ask any QB and they will tell you they love a good run game and a big 6-6" TE to throw over the middle to or in the redzone....
Click to expand...

Personally, I think that we should move Waller inside. He fits that bill. Maybe he doesn't have the slashing ability needed at Aback.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top