Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 50

recruiting for 2013--CPJ says we need running backs

This is a discussion on recruiting for 2013--CPJ says we need running backs within the Georgia Tech Football forums, part of the Georgia Tech Sports Message Boards category; no argument from me. BB is a serious need for us, IMO. according to AJC, we've offered seven HS running ...

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date

    Aug 2011
    Posts

    5,336

    recruiting for 2013--CPJ says we need running backs

    no argument from me. BB is a serious need for us, IMO. according to AJC, we've offered seven HS running backs so far. be nice to land two, very solid backs. or, maybe just one seriously incredible one . . .

    more here:

    Georgia Tech may have smaller recruiting class for 2013 | AJC College Sports Recruiting


  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date

    Aug 2011
    Posts

    9,485
    Hell yes we do. Been screaming that for a while now. Had Perkins panned out at BB, we would be in a better position. If Marcus is a super stud, he could probably play some BB as a TFR. I wouldn't mind seeing Perkins get reps at AB to add muscle to the position, but Sims needs a backup. Snoddy at BB intrigues me as well. Maybe he and Perkins can switch, although he may be a good AB too if his speed is as advertised. Who knows. Im ready to do some evaluating! Maybe CPJ will throw us a bone and give us a few open Saturday scrimmages.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date

    Aug 2011
    Posts

    5,336
    Quote Originally Posted by HelluvaMGTmjr View Post
    Been screaming that for a while now.
    you and me both! i wanna see the BB position as the crown jewel of this offense. that's how it was with dwyer in '09. it was that way during CPJ's southern days. ready for it to be that way on the flats. it's a vital piece of this offense.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date

    Aug 2011
    Location

    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts

    6,673
    Quote Originally Posted by stonedwall View Post
    you and me both! i wanna see the BB position as the crown jewel of this offense. that's how it was with dwyer in '09. it was that way during CPJ's southern days. ready for it to be that way on the flats. it's a vital piece of this offense.
    I bet those Southern teams had some hosses up front who could block somebody.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date

    Aug 2011
    Posts

    5,336
    Quote Originally Posted by dressedcheeseside View Post
    I bet those Southern teams had some hosses up front who could block somebody.
    they were your typical CPJ/sewak style OL. quick outta the gates, stayed low, and would cut block their own grandmothers. but, it also helped having greg hill and JR revere at QB. they could run the option with such seamless precision. everything just "fit". nothing was forced or disjointed.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date

    Aug 2011
    Location

    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts

    6,673
    What kills me is the article says Ugag has room for 30 in next year's class. How is that possible? I know it says some could enroll early and count against last year's class, but that's only if there was room in last year's class. Didn't they sign a big class last year? I just don't get it and Ugag claims not to oversign. They must have huge attrition is all I can guess.

    I guess I shouldn't complain. I did the math and if team x had zero attrition over 5 years and redshirted every freshman, the most it could sign yearly is 17. That would give them 85 players over 5 years. I've believe the path for success at GT is to get as close to this model as possible. We're not going to out talent anyone, we're gonna have to out veteran them. We still need talent and a handful of extraordinary players goes a long way, but if we want to compete consistently with the big boys, we're gonna need balanced classes and two deeps littered with 4th and 5th year players.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date

    Aug 2011
    Posts

    9,485
    I am so tired of hearing how great the option was run at Navy and GSU. Not directed towards you Stoned, just saying...What the heck is our problem? OL attrition?! That is getting old. I am of course assuming the implication is that we still aren't running it as good at GT. sorry, don't want to hijack this thread as I love talking RBs.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date

    Aug 2011
    Posts

    5,336
    the article states we're going to have a rather small signing class for 2013. 14-15 total. what are our needs and how many at each position are we looking for? i'm thinking:

    BB--2
    OL--3
    DL--3
    LB--2
    secondary--2
    "athletes"--3 (AB, QB, WR)

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date

    Aug 2011
    Posts

    4,893
    Quote Originally Posted by stonedwall View Post
    the article states we're going to have a rather small signing class for 2013. 14-15 total. what are our needs and how many at each position are we looking for? i'm thinking:

    BB--2
    OL--3
    DL--3
    LB--2
    secondary--2
    "athletes"--3 (AB, QB, WR)
    I know this list is inaccurate, but who would be our 2012 staring AB's : Bostic, Orwin, Zenon, Godhigh, Deon Hill, Paige, Justin Thomas, Snoddy, Golden, Demond Smith. When you look at that bunch, to me it becomes "Orwin and then all the rest". Some speed, but very little brawn and very little real experience. Who can actually block or catch a pass or a toss? It seemed like just yesterday the debate was how would we be able get all the AB talent onto the field enough.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date

    Aug 2011
    Posts

    9,485
    Yuk, we don't know what they can or can't do. Hopefully blocking for Orwin is on the list. Another ? for the offense. We may come to realize just how crucial Roddy's blocking was.

    I'm optimistic on AB. We have so many bodies there...all we need is one or two to be good.
    Last edited by HelluvaMGTmjr; 03-16-2012 at 12:09 PM.

 

 
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •