Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mavric

ILB Baron Hopson

HuskerBoard Predictor  

2 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Player: Baron Hopson

Hometown: Leesburg, Georgia

School: Lee County

Position: Linebacker

Height: 5-11

Weight: 200

40 Time

Offers: Indiana, Nebraska

Visits

 

Twitter

 

247 Composite: #819 Overall; #29 ILB; .8427; :ThreeStar:

 

Rivals: #21 ILB; :ThreeStar:
247: #38 ILB; :ThreeStar:
ESPN: :ThreeStar:

 

Hudl

Share this post


Link to post

For as much as this staff looks for specific body types at given positions, I like that they're willing to offer kids who don't fit the mold but are just great players. Being too rigid with physical standards for a position arguable cost us Bryson Williams, and Hopson is fun to watch. Really good blitzer and people go backwards when he hits them.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Husker in WI said:

For as much as this staff looks for specific body types at given positions, I like that they're willing to offer kids who don't fit the mold but are just great players. Being too rigid with physical standards for a position arguable cost us Bryson Williams, and Hopson is fun to watch. Really good blitzer and people go backwards when he hits them.

This staff is more interested in what kids can do versus how they "look", whether that's their ranking or build. In this case, one of the few standards is that he can move sideline to sideline and is a fluid athlete.

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post

@Mavric, so it looks like we might land the Malcom kid ... at least we hope so.  If so, that would be our third ILB for the class.  This guy would be our fourth ILB.  What gives?  How many ILB are we taking?  Which ones would be moved to OLB?  

Curious what other info or insights others might see here.

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, BigRedN said:

@Mavric, so it looks like we might land the Malcom kid ... at least we hope so.  If so, that would be our third ILB for the class.  This guy would be our fourth ILB.  What gives?  How many ILB are we taking?  Which ones would be moved to OLB?  

Curious what other info or insights others might see here.

 

Not really sure to be honest with you.  From what I can tell, they open to move guys back and forth to some extent as needed.

 

Generally speaking, it seems like the shorter guys are pegged as ILBs and the lanky guys are OLBs - especially the weakside OLBs.

 

I would guess that some of it is I'm not sure we found the true ILBs in last year's class.  Greene was generally listed as an OLB but we're going to play him inside (at least to start) because we need help there.  But perhaps if we find a couple more prototypical ILBs in this class a couple other guys will move outside.

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Mavric said:

 

Not really sure to be honest with you.  From what I can tell, they open to move guys back and forth to some extent as needed.

 

Generally speaking, it seems like the shorter guys are pegged as ILBs and the lanky guys are OLBs - especially the weakside OLBs.

 

I would guess that some of it is I'm not sure we found the true ILBs in last year's class.  Greene was generally listed as an OLB but we're going to play him inside (at least to start) because we need help there.  But perhaps if we find a couple more prototypical ILBs in this class a couple other guys will move outside.


Thanks @Mavric.  I hate to say it ... but in my "small recruiting brain", impacted by years of missing out on the better player, I can't help but have the thought that we are in a weaker position with OLB's like Ford and Bollers so we will get who we can for LB's and then move them.  I really am starting to hate that we don't recruit a player for a position and let them develop in that one spot.  It's great to have a guy that can play anywhere ... but for us ... we always seem to be short at "that" position [what "that" position is] and then move a player from his "bread and butter" to what we have to use him for.  

I'm hopeful that I'm blowing hot smoke up my own butt ... but these are the "thoughts" that run through my head over years of "emotional abuse" from the recruiting threads [true confessions I guess ... :-)]

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, BigRedN said:

Thanks @Mavric.  I hate to say it ... but in my "small recruiting brain", impacted by years of missing out on the better player, I can't help but have the thought that we are in a weaker position with OLB's like Ford and Bollers so we will get who we can for LB's and then move them.  I really am starting to hate that we don't recruit a player for a position and let them develop in that one spot.  It's great to have a guy that can play anywhere ... but for us ... we always seem to be short at "that" position [what "that" position is] and then move a player from his "bread and butter" to what we have to use him for.  

I'm hopeful that I'm blowing hot smoke up my own butt ... but these are the "thoughts" that run through my head over years of "emotional abuse" from the recruiting threads [true confessions I guess ... :-)]

 

I think being "short" at certain positions is just kind of the norm now-a-days.  Not just for us, for most programs.  We just notice it more here because we're more familiar with the Huskers.

 

I don't think a lot of people realize that scholarship limits make it really difficult to keep enough talent stockpiled at all positions.  Unless you are Alabama, Clemson or Ohio State and have four-stars coming out your ears. 

 

And it always looks worse in the offseason.  We lost 17 scholarship seniors after last year.  We have 19 incoming freshmen plus five JUCOs.  And we have 21 guys who redshirted last year.  That means out of 85 possible scholarships we have a grand total 37 that either did play last year or we can infer from them not playing that they have some work to do. 

 

Edited by Mavric
I'm stupid and bad at math.

Share this post


Link to post

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.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...