In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 79
Online now 313 Record: 4815 (3/13/2012)
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Miller? The long snapper is a reach -- that is a reach to say that. He will start for 4 years as a long snapper. You know what other program signed a long snapper as a specialty player -- Alabama.
Bama has talent on top of talent, do we?
They did well no doubt but I would trade Hannon & Johnson for any combination of
Ethan Pocic (LSU - IL), Kyle Bosch (UM - IL), David Dawson (UM-MI), Patrick Kugler (UM - PA), Dorian Johnson (PItt - PA), Steven Elmer (ND - MI), Evan Lisle (OSU - OH), Chris Fox (UM - CO), Logan Tulley-Tillman (UM - IL)
and not bat an eye. There was a great opportunity to pull in immediate help with Finnin & Chongo, then pull high school OL in Knevel, two kids above (hell id keep Hannon if it ment G. Miller wasnt taking up space but thats another discussion) and add them to Thurston, Reeves, Sterup and then hit the midland region in 2014 for another three high level OL. We simply put have got to stop losing so much OL talent in Big Ten country, Michigan for pete sake took five of the best OL in the entire region and they also happened to be five high level OL prospects.
Bamboo, or else...
Gladney isn't a reach. I'll stake my claim to that one.
The other three I don't dispute much:
Maurice is a senior film guy. Thought it was telling that a few teams showed up late. I like Collins a lot more.
Boaz is liked a lot by our national analysts but I'm not sold either.
Miller is a long snapper. I've got no issue giving him a scholarship. He'll have more than earned it by the end of his sophomore year.
Twitter: @mikejschaefer Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Saved me some typing! Perfect.
I agree with your thoughts, but still think the class is worthy of a B. Misses at DT, CB and WR make it hard to justify anything higher, imo.
I'll disagree on Miller, myself. If Miller can comes in, as expected, and replace Mangieri from day one -- It will have been a major success. It was a need, the coaches thought it was a large enough need to use a scholarship on, and Miller is expected to do well. I won't act like I know a damn thing about sizing up a long snapper and his potential, but those better-informed than me seem to think highly of him. Hard for me to call a player a reach when he's looked at as top-ten in his position.
247 says #3, Scout says #2 in the class, #4 on Chris Sailer Kicking, Rivals doesn't rank LS.
I was just being generous in my refute.
Hell I'll give it an A for us Bone Hard Lemonade drinkers. A+ if we could have snagged Willis or Hooks. Love every single player in this class.
The rankings of the class range from 11-23 so we are between a great class and a C+ class?
It is a reach to me because we need players, in other positions than to save a schollie for a LS.
Scout and ESPN suck, so we are between a 17-20 class(18-20). IYAM. Even though we should be 18th on rivals than 17th.
Gladney is NOT a reach. Guaranteed. You put Gladney on a team with a Qb that isnt god awful he would be a high 4* or perhaps better. Saying Gladney is a reach leads me to believe all you do is stargaze.
Should have read this before posting my last comment.
If you are going to troll at least do a better job at it. How dare we have good special team snaps....lol.
Whoa bump the brakes here.
You're correct Gladney isn't a 'reach' but he in no way shape or form is a high four-star or higher, WR prospect with a QB.
Gladney is a nice possession WR who runs in the mid 4.76-4.78 range. He's a guy who doesn't require attention and will never be the type of prospect who is going to take the top off a Defense or make something out of nothing. He's a solid WR addition who can go over the middle & make catches in traffic due to his size & great hands.
...mid 4.76-4.78 range?
I'll mark this as a new high in precise speaking.
I may have over stepped a tad. But I think very very highly of Gladney. And he is in no way a reach. +1
This post was edited by iBleedRed6801 14 months ago
not sure what you mean at the end of this post... Rivals doesn't consider Singleton a commitment so if anything we should be ranked higher than where they have us. Maybe that's what you were saying but I was genuinely confused.
Washington has 2 less commits than us, but a better star average, so they should be ahead of us, in the rankings but aren't because of the number of commits. So we should be 18 and uw should be 17th.
I bet you weren't making that argument in our favor the last 2 years when our star rating was high
This post was edited by nustudent 14 months ago
Yes I would, since rankings are mostly off star rating. But rivals counts # of commits more than 247.
Also on paper that was a great class, but like I said 2 years ago and last year, not enough numbers. 19 commits and 6 are already gone. That leaves us with 13 from that class.
This post was edited by Landohusker 14 months ago
So in your opinion our ranking was higher than 15th and 25th on Rivals the last two years?
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports