ESPN Previews RB, OG and DE Position Battles

[Danny Bateman]

Yes that makes sense.

You have a future all American at guard in your eyes, so you move him to DT.

The logic of the former staff is mind numbing.

I also get a little bit tired of hearing how so and so player does "really well" in practice yet they never see the field on game day? What the hell were those coaches waiting for? I don't get it.

This staff supposedly had learned their lesson after that 2012 season when they said there were a lot of guys they should have played.

We needed help at guard badly last year. You had Ameer Abdullah in your backfield being crushed and eventually being injured. You have a future all American at guard who sits on the bench and watches the offensive line suck. This kid had to sit and watch Cotton all season long?

Anyways. I truly hope this is not the way the next staff approaches things. I don't think they will.

The best players should be playing and they should be playing at the position they are best at. PERIOD.

As coaches, it is your job to determine who those guys are and develop their skills at that position.

Damn I got a deep lack of respect for that former staff. Bunch of morons.

Foster was at DT for like 2 weeks when only Collins, Valentine, and Maurice were available to play (Williams rolled his ankle and missed the first couple of weeks). Everyone thought we were fine at Guard until the Michigan State game, and even then we attributed it to running into an MSU team that was ready to play when we weren't (something that happened a lot in the Pelini era). Foster might have been physically ready, but might not have been able to learn the playbook or by the time he had learned the playbook the coaches decided it was late enough in the year that they didn't want to burn his redshirt.

Okay. So we needed depth at DT. So we moved Foster there and you have a coach saying he did really well there. Then the next step in any natural order is 1: you need a player at a position 2: you have a player that does really well there - the next logical step? 3: PLAY THE FREAKING GUY THEN.

As to your other point, there was never a time anyone felt good about the guard position. Cotton played almost non-stop at LG with no depth behind him and RG was a musical chairs. There was no clear solution at RG.

So if I know that, the whole world knows that, then the coaches know that. So here you have a former coach saying that Foster is a possible future All American at guard by the time he's done here. That's fine, by the time he's done. Development obviously takes a while at that position. But the reason development usually takes awhile at offensive line, the reason a lot of guys red shirt their first year on the offensive line, is because they usually need to build up physically.

Well this coach and others say Foster was all there physically. Other players I believe even said Foster was a physical beast. So what you're telling me is that former staff was not capable of coaching a kid enough to come in and make at least some sort of impact, provide even a touch of depth, at a position that as I said, was in dire need of help?

That's ridiculous. It shouldn't be that complicated.

Nepotism at its finest.

 

[Hunter94]

Yes that makes sense.

You have a future all American at guard in your eyes, so you move him to DT.

The logic of the former staff is mind numbing.

I also get a little bit tired of hearing how so and so player does "really well" in practice yet they never see the field on game day? What the hell were those coaches waiting for? I don't get it.

This staff supposedly had learned their lesson after that 2012 season when they said there were a lot of guys they should have played.

We needed help at guard badly last year. You had Ameer Abdullah in your backfield being crushed and eventually being injured. You have a future all American at guard who sits on the bench and watches the offensive line suck. This kid had to sit and watch Cotton all season long?

Anyways. I truly hope this is not the way the next staff approaches things. I don't think they will.

The best players should be playing and they should be playing at the position they are best at. PERIOD.

As coaches, it is your job to determine who those guys are and develop their skills at that position.

Damn I got a deep lack of respect for that former staff. Bunch of morons.

Foster was at DT for like 2 weeks when only Collins, Valentine, and Maurice were available to play (Williams rolled his ankle and missed the first couple of weeks). Everyone thought we were fine at Guard until the Michigan State game, and even then we attributed it to running into an MSU team that was ready to play when we weren't (something that happened a lot in the Pelini era). Foster might have been physically ready, but might not have been able to learn the playbook or by the time he had learned the playbook the coaches decided it was late enough in the year that they didn't want to burn his redshirt.

Okay.So we needed depth at DT. So we moved Foster there and you have a coach saying he did really well there. Then the next step in any natural order is 1: you need a player at a position 2: you have a player that does really well there - the next logical step? 3: PLAY THE FREAKING GUY THEN.

As to your other point, there was never a time anyone felt good about the guard position. Cotton played almost non-stop at LG with no depth behind him and RG was a musical chairs. There was no clear solution at RG.

So if I know that, the whole world knows that, then the coaches know that. So here you have a former coach saying that Foster is a possible future All American at guard by the time he's done here. That's fine, by the time he's done. Development obviously takes a while at that position. But the reason development usually takes awhile at offensive line, the reason a lot of guys red shirt their first year on the offensive line, is because they usually need to build up physically.

Well this coach and others say Foster was all there physically. Other players I believe even said Foster was a physical beast. So what you're telling me is that former staff was not capable of coaching a kid enough to come in and make at least some sort of impact, provide even a touch of depth, at a position that as I said, was in dire need of help?

That's ridiculous. It shouldn't be that complicated.

Nepotism at its finest.

yup, gonna miss this former staff like a case of hemroids!

 

[True2tRA]

I think nepotism was part of it but I think it goes even past that.

I think it's a pure inability to develop talent, teach your principles and scheme, and a lack of commitment to developing depth. I think the former staff really undervalued the benefits of game experience.

I've said it before that I think it's going to be very interesting to see who moves where and what new faces we see in the coming season. I think this staff may find some completely mis-managed and under utilized talent on this team.

 

[Danny Bateman]

I think nepotism was part of it but I think it goes even past that.

I think it's a pure inability to develop talent, teach your principles and scheme, and a lack of commitment to developing depth. I think the former staff really undervalued the benefits of game experience.

I've said it before that I think it's going to be very interesting to see who moves where and what new faces we see in the coming season. I think this staff may find some completely mis-managed and under utilized talent on this team.

One of my biggest beefs with the last staff was that we constantly heard coach speak about how good younger guys were how much they tore things up in practice, etc., only to see the same (underachieving) faces on Saturdays.
That screams nepotism to me. But the fact that they never trusted new faces on game days likely stems from some combination of issues you already listed above.

Bo really did screw us pretty badly in terms of depth by taking a large class his first year and having a poor success rate with those guys and on the OL in general.

 

[Lyons in the Sea of Red.]

I have a feeling Wilbon will have something to say about the RB position.

 

[True2tRA]

I have a feeling Wilbon will have something to say about the RB position.

http://www.hudl.com/athlete/2499034/highlights/111512397/v2

Wilbon has good north and south speed but still seems plenty shifty. I think he will earn some carries.

I'm still a big fan of what Imani Cross can do. I'd also really like to see Adam Taylor get in there and sow what he can do.

We could have a real four headed monster at running back if the coaches decide to do so.

 

[QMany]

Foster has no excuses now, the staff is gone. I expect an All-American Guard.