2 questions - One on recruiting DBs and the other on Stoudermire

Donate To GopherHole
MNSpaniel

MNSpaniel

Active member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
984
Reaction score
184
Points
43
Most of the posts I read on Gopherhole seem to think the DBs are the weak link in the defense. If that is one of our weakest positions then why are we turning away what seems to be a quality recruit who wanted to commit to the U of M. (sorry I can't remember his name).

Also, I think Stoudermire would make a good corner. He tackles well on special teams and could still remain the kick-off specialist. We seem to have some good receivers coming in along with the ones we already have. I didn't see him catch a pass yesterday so it is not like the offense would be missing a key player.
 

Maybe they should try the Run & Shoot. Have Stoudermire play slot-wr/rb.

Next year the Wish-Bone.
 

I REALLY like the potential of Stoudemire. Every kick off has the potential to be taken to the house with him back there. Now sure of his hands as a wide receiver, but I haven't seen as much of him as most on this board.

That said, with limited knowledge, I think he could make a great CB. Has great speed, seems like he has loose and shifty hips to turn and run with receivers, and as a WR should be able to make some plays on the ball.
 


recruiting DB

Lee wouldn't know a quality DB if he hit him in the hands for 6.Lee recruits thugs.
 



runningmama said:
Lee wouldn't know a quality DB if he hit him in the hands for 6.Lee recruits thugs.
Click to expand...
If you don't know what a word means, don't use it. Go ahead and look up the accepted dictionary definition of "thug" and please tell me what member of the University of Minnesota's football team fits that description.
 

Most of the posts I read on Gopherhole seem to think the DBs are the weak link in the defense

If they could get some damn pressure on the Quarterback then maybe the DBs wouldn't look so bad. Even the majority of the "blown coverage" big gainers were on plays where the QB got to stand back there and wait and wait for someone to get clear.

Weber is ALWAYS getting hit or sacked even taking out the times he should have run or unloaded the ball. The Opposing QB seems to have to to scan the field, have a cup of coffee and THEN unload the ball....and it's been that way for YEARS!

Get five or six sacks in a game and some of the performances of the DBs is going to look remarkedly improved.
 

I do agree that Stoudermire would make a better CB than WR. It would be a smart move.
 



All you people calling for Stoudermire to be moved to CB obviously don't remember the fact that last year he was at CB and was moved to WR in the spring. We had this debate at length about 6 months ago. My stance is the coaching staff moved him to offense for a reason.
 

runningmama said:
Lee wouldn't know a quality DB if he hit him in the hands for 6.Lee recruits thugs.
Click to expand...

Traye Simmons certainly strikes me as a thug. A happy-go-lucky attitude and big smile are the universal trademarks of the gangsta lifestyle. And that Moses Alipate. There's a devious street tough for you.
 

Handsome Pete said:
Traye Simmons certainly strikes me as a thug. A happy-go-lucky attitude and big smile are the universal trademarks of the gangsta lifestyle. And that Moses Alipate. There's a devious street tough for you.
Click to expand...

Kenneth on 30 Rock: poster boy for the thug lifestyle.
 

ask a dumb question and...

PlayHosea said:
If you don't know what a word means, don't use it. Go ahead and look up the accepted dictionary definition of "thug" and please tell me what member of the University of Minnesota's football team fits that description.
Click to expand...

"often a criminal, who treats others violently and roughly..."
20091102__091103Sports-Carter_Michael_200.jpg


thug_photo_sculpture_photosculpture-p153001776307404028qdjh_400.jpg
003D.gif
CEKAKBOXCADRVQR.20080718215132.jpg


thuggish behavior eg: University police officers passing by in an unmarked car saw Gopher linebacker Gary Tinsley “swinging around a wood board during the fight” according to the police report.
 



Now I wish these kids would just get meaner during the play of the game and not in dinky town.

And yes I am sure they are more or less good kids just being idiots, but I had a good laugh at the old semantical "you don't even know what a thug is" line of argument. Not a good year for that kind of wagon circling, me boy!
 

Back to the OP, I am disappointed that this is such an area of concern considering that the program seemed so focused on recruiting dbs in the 08 class. At that time I thought this next season would be the emergence of a new era of Gopher coverage, now I am ready to see a return to Mason like futility...argh. I hope all those kids that have come in really emerge, but am confused as to why they haven't seen the field more already when the secondary has struggled.

Carter, if he can smarten up and stop being stupid on the street, has shown flashes of something better especially if he can get a little heavier and harder hitting, but otherwise.. yeesh. I am disappointed we had to go and get a juco again in the third full Brewster class to patch holes in the secondary.
 


PlayHosea said:
Per Merriam-Webster's dictionary: "a brutal ruffian or assasin". I'll take that definition over Wikipedia. Nice try though.
Click to expand...

let us settle on ruffian which you will notice means a brutal person which of course Master Webster will note means "suggests a lack of intelligence, feeling, or humanity...cruel or coldblooded".

thug_photo_sculpture_photosculpture-p153001776307404028qdjh_400.jpg
for short
 

I think we are getting adequate pressure on the quarterback and cornerback is the hardest position on the field to play. So my blame on the passing game is our safeties. They need to become effective on the field in some way. Either they need to come up and be a legit run stopper or they need to be able to cover their side of the field and make a play once in a while. They do neither. Royston is an arm tackler with no punch. Theret is a little better on the run. However, they both are always a step slow helping out over the top or when they actually have to take a man themselves. It's no secret where the opposing offenses are attacking. Neither has delivered a punishing hit anywhere on the field.

I want a safety like the Cal safety that took Decker's head off at the goal line. Oh, and I have to mention how lame Sherels was at the end of the first half down at the goal line. Instead of coming up and delivering a hit at the 6 to hold Illinois, he arm tackled and the ball carrier got down to the 1 yard line. This is not the same Sherels as last season that's for sure.
 

ulfr said:
let us settle on ruffian which you will notice means a brutal person which of course Master Webster will note means "suggests a lack of intelligence, feeling, or humanity...cruel or coldblooded".

thug_photo_sculpture_photosculpture-p153001776307404028qdjh_400.jpg
for short
Click to expand...

So you're saying our players lack intelligence, feeling or humanity because....what, one of them got drunk and almost got in a fight? Waved a piece of wood in the air? Had a disagreement with a bouncer?

I wish these kids had perfect behavior too, but I'm not about to call them thugs because a couple of them made minor mistakes.

I think Khaliq is right. You're dropping code words over there....perhaps you'd be more comfortable in Madison??
 


DiehardGopher said:
My stance is the coaching staff moved him to offense for a reason.
Click to expand...

Coaching staffs never make mistakes. Everything they do is above question. This is the reason why they enjoy such unparalleled job security.
 

our tackles are average

our DE's are non-existent

our linebackers play hard and are tough but are below average

our secondary is brutal
 

dpodoll68 said:
Coaching staffs never make mistakes. Everything they do is above question. This is the reason why they enjoy such unparalleled job security.
Click to expand...

That isn't even close to the point I was making with my post. Of course coaches make mistakes. But coaches make much better personnel decisions than people on this board. The plain and simple fact is that no one on this board knows how Stoudermire looks at CB. What we do know is that the coaches moved him from CB to WR. I have to assume there is a reason behind that. To say that he would be better at CB than he is at WR is just stupid.
 

DiehardGopher said:
That isn't even close to the point I was making with my post. Of course coaches make mistakes. But coaches make much better personnel decisions than people on this board. The plain and simple fact is that no one on this board knows how Stoudermire looks at CB. What we do know is that the coaches moved him from CB to WR. I have to assume there is a reason behind that. To say that he would be better at CB than he is at WR is just stupid.
Click to expand...

So, basically, you say "of course coaches make mistakes", and then proceed throughout the rest of your post to say how there is no possible way that he could be a better CB than WR because the coaches moved him there. Good to know.

For the record, I am on the Brewster bandwagon. But his W/L record indicates that he and his staff are not above reproach when it comes to their decision-making skills. In fact, it could be very likely that Stoudermire is better at CB than WR. Just because the coaches *think* he is not does not make it so.

The whole "the coaches know better than us" argument is so inherently flawed and ridiculous that I can't believe it keeps coming up over and over again on this board.
 

dpodoll68 said:
The whole "the coaches know better than us" argument is so inherently flawed and ridiculous that I can't believe it keeps coming up over and over again on this board.
Click to expand...

Your point is that you know better than the coaches, even though you have never seen Troy play corner back?

Well I would say one of the arguments here is ridiculous
 

dwminn said:
Your point is that you know better than the coaches, even though you have never seen Troy play corner back?

Well I would say one of the arguments here is ridiculous
Click to expand...

Please show me where I said, or even insinuated, that I know better than the coaches. Thanks.
 

Originally Posted by dpodoll68 View Post
The whole "the coaches know better than us" argument is so inherently flawed and ridiculous that I can't believe it keeps coming up over and over again on this board.

Your words -- or are you not one of "us"?
 

dpodoll68 said:
The whole "the coaches know better than us" argument is so inherently flawed and ridiculous that I can't believe it keeps coming up over and over again on this board.
Click to expand...

Please show me how "the coaches know better than us" is flawed? Are you a D1 head football coach? Are you a member of a D1 coaching staff? If the answer to both of those is no, then the coaches do know better than you, or anyone else on this board.

Secondly, I could argue that this statement "Coaching staffs never make mistakes. Everything they do is above question. This is the reason why they enjoy such unparalleled job security." is an insinuation that you know better than the coaches since you attack the coaches.

Let me inform you of something. When you attack an idea like you have in that statement, it is interpreted as you holding the other point of view which in this case, would be you knowing better than the coaches.

Either way I am done posting in this thread since last time this topic came up you and I went back and forth. I have said what I think and defended my position. Nothing else needs to be said.
 

Not only is the argument not flawed or ridiculous I would say in 100% of all cases any coach in the country knows his or her players skills better than some idiot on a fans message board.
and to save you some trouble I consider myself one of the idiots on the fans message boards.
 

Again, I have never said that I know better than the coaches. Obviously, they have a greater base of knowledge to work from than the average fan.

My problem is the oft-repeated argument that "the coaches see these guys in practice every day, so they know better than us what to do." While the former half is undoubtedly true, the latter is obviously up for debate. No coach knows anything about his players. He thinks what he wants, based on observation, and puts his players in what he thinks are the best positions for them to succeed. Obviously, he is not always correct, because if he were, coaches would never get fired.

And yes, the argument is horribly flawed. It presupposes that a great knowledge base eliminates the possibility of mistakes. If that were the case, doctors and lawyers would never get sued for malpractice. Every politician would be elected up to the term limit. No NASCAR driver would ever get in a crash. Every Steven Spielberg movie would set a new record for box office gross. Et cetera, et cetera.

You are also guilty of advancing the fallacy of composition (in other words, taking something to be true for the whole when it is only true for a part). When it comes to the overall running of a program, obviously Brewster, or any other coach, would do a better job than you or I. But when it comes down to individual decisions like this, it is a 50/50 proposition - it is either right or wrong. On individual decisions, he has just as much likelihood as I do of being right. It is in the cumulative effort where his experience and knowledge would prove far superior to mine. But, as I have already shown, on individual decisions, the average fan can be correct when the coach is wrong. The only way I would be proven wrong is if they allowed Stoudermire a full season to play CB, like he has just been given to play WR. But since that's not going to happen, we can sit here all day and talk in circles, and I will not concede, nor be proven wrong on, the point.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom