Hiveredtech...

[ContactBuzz]

Assuming the 10 commitments follow through and sign, how do you think the coaching staff would prioritize the needs for the remaining offers? Will we sign a TE and/or a FB this year?

The total number of 17 seems to be the overall target - what positions do you think the staff will try to fill with the remaining 7 schollys?

 

[hiveredtech]

Assuming the 10 commitments follow through and sign, how do you think the coaching staff would prioritize the needs for the remaining offers? Will we sign a TE and/or a FB this year?

The total number of 17 seems to be the overall target - what positions do you think the staff will try to fill with the remaining 7 schollys?

Right now we have exactly 16 spots (73 on scholarship and 10 seniors). However, there will be attrition (at least two) and some other circumstances to bring the total higher. I would guess we sign 17-20 depending on the talent and academic level of the recruit.

I believe the staff will take as many of the rangy athletes they can get this year because you can do so much with them. Some of them could even grow into OLB's.

At TE and FB, my belief is they have just not found the right fit yet and do not want to give a scholarship for the sake of filling the position since we have to operate with 6 less than our competitors for a couple of years.

I do not think anyone would disagree that we are operating thin at TE after this season, but we will still have Riles, Peek, and Barrick next year. Peek and Barrick are going to be excellent players.

FB is the most thin as Cox is the man. Bray will need time to get ready for D1 football...and walk-on Matt Kamp could spot fill. You may see some TE's spot fill like we used Foschi. You could also see a DL spot fill in goal line situations if we had to. For instance, Robert Hall and Matt Braman plsyed some good FB in high school. Quincy Kelly is another young man that could get bigger/stronger and end up at FB, assuming he does not get moved to OLB...which is certainly possible this fall.

The one thing I have not checked into, is the staff could already feel good about our position with a couple of rising juniors at those spots.

It is pretty obvious who our first 16 commitments should be, so it will be interesting to see what we do with the next 1-4 spots after that. I believe some of those spots could be waiting for a couple of DL's that have some academic work to do to get in (Tucker, Monroe, McRay, Carter, etc.).

Did that help at all?

 

[ContactBuzz]

Yup - thanks.

FB seems like a major area of need (with Guadagni leaving school) and I haven't seen any FBs mentioned. But taking the most talented & athletic guys makes the most sense with the scholarship reductions.

And aside from Woods, I haven't seen any TEs listed - it's not as much a critical need now but a TE will always be a component of a Gailey coached team.

 

[BarrelORum]

Hiveredtech is right. We need to give ships to the best available players and cannot target needs. With Bray coming on board and Cox only a Junior, we are ok at the FB position. I also think we are fine at TE with Riles, Peek, and Barrick.

I think we will take one more DB, hopefully Everson, but I'm not counting on him anymore.

I think we will take two more Dlineman, an OLineman and then after that it will be all skill positions. Maybe another RB, a QB, a WR, who knows how it will play out. there are several combinations.

I doubt though that we will take more than 17 unless between now and January someone fails out of school. But that is strictly my opinion.

 

[hugegtfan]

Effect of "Spread Offense" on FB

I have heard we are going to the spread, yet I also hear that our formations and plays are not that different from before. What do you think the "change" in our offense will have on the use of the position in general.

 

[hiveredtech]

Re: Effect of "Spread Offense" on FB

I have heard we are going to the spread, yet I also hear that our formations and plays are not that different from before. What do you think the "change" in our offense will have on the use of the position in general.

They said that most fans would not be able to notice much. Remember that 'spread offense' is an extremely wide definition with no schools really doing the same thing.

Most likely there will be a lot of new routes, some new motions....who knows.

 

[BeerNutts]

Re: Effect of "Spread Offense" on FB

I have heard we are going to the spread, yet I also hear that our formations and plays are not that different from before. What do you think the "change" in our offense will have on the use of the position in general.

I think he said it because we ran alot of "spread" last year. We lined up in 3 and 4 WR sets a good bit last year, and we had Reggie in the shotgun a good bit last year too. Although we were usually in a 2-back set (I-formation) last year, I think we'll see more Shotgun 1-back, 1TE formations, and 3 WR's or 1 Slot-back and 2 WR's.

that's just a guess from what I'm read, nothing solid. I could be totally wrong, and we line up in the I 75% of the time.