In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 477
Online now 541 Record: 5366 (2/4/2013)
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.
to Notre Dame.
Best of luck to him. You couldn't pay me to play for Brian Kelly.
Golden is better then Jimbo... I feared it was true. He is going to hoist a crystal ball there - fsufsu
Interesting last time I checked notre shame wasn't just named tightend u.
My thoughts exactly.
I'm sure Golden and co. will still contact just to gauge interest. Our football atmosphere needs to get better
I really don't see the value in us signing two tight ends this cycle.
We already have six and none of them are Seniors this season.
We've got one verbal so far and I think that's plenty.
Having more than four tight ends at one time is goofy. Next season we'll have seven with four being seniors.
Sign one this year and one next year and we'll be back to having sane numbers and a normal eligibility spread at the position.
You've only got 85 scholarships to go around so having more than four tight ends is nonsensical. It takes away from scholarship depth at another position.
Especially when our O-Line numbers are atrocious. This scholarship needs to go to a O-Linemen.
We have 2 pass catching tight ends..... Both juniors yeah we need them
Football wise Walford is a Sophomore.
I disagree. Most teams play at least 3 and up to 4 TE's during a game on offense & they could also help out on ST. (or RS)... 4 would be the very minimum, not maximum.
Cause David Perry and Dyron Dye aren't what I would call true TEs.
"There's going to be a lot of people who didn't stand with us who are going to be remembered for not standing with us." - Al Golden
But then where else do you take away numbers.
You only 85 scholarships.
This is the way I see the scholarship breakdown.
Optimal Current 2012 Seniors
QB 5 5
RB 5 5 (1)
FB 2 2 (1)
TE 4 6
WR 9 10 (2)
OL 16 13 (2)
41 41 (6)
DE 9 8
DT 9 10 (1)
LB 10 11 (1)
CB 8 8 (1)
S 6 6 (2)
42 43 (5)
K 2 3 (2)
85 87 (13)
Even if you take a number away from another position group and assign it to tight end that would make the tight end number 5. If you want to push it to six you would have to reassign another one of your numbers. Which group(s) would you take numbers from in this breakdown to move the tight ends to six.
Plus signing two tight ends in this class would push the TE number to eight. Now you have to grab two more from another group.
The majority of the time you have one or two tight ends on the field. It's not that valuable of a position relatively speaking.
I have NO clue honestly. Just taking a wild guess at an ideal roster breakdown here:
OL - 15, DL - 15, DB - 12, LB - 10, WR - 10, RB - 7, TE - 7, QB - 5, K/P - 4
Only 37 scholarship defenders? Ouch!
If it were me I would take take two of those tight ends and two of those running backs and move them over to defense.
There's really no right/wrong answer.
For my money I would like to see them hold at one tight end this year.
Again that's assuming they use that ship in an area where I feel they have to.
I think the anchor around our neck at the position is the duo of Sanders and White.
I just don't see how either of those dudes play significant minutes for us.......ever.
It's almost as if we need to bring in two tight ends cause those dudes are permanently attached to the bottom of the depth chart.
Maybe they need to get "processed"
Meant 7 total between RB/FB's...
I was gonna go back & say maybe take away 1 TE, WR, RB & add more DB's/LB's.
For a rough draft it's not bad. Also realistically wouldn't have 4 kickers/punters on scholly.
It's All About The U
I think If we bring in 2 TEs then we will likely say bye to Sanders and White. Jmo
one name why TE are running away Standish Dodard. Nobody wants to compete against him
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports