Started By
Message
Good thread on 2014 class
Posted on 2/28/17 at 7:06 am
Posted on 2/28/17 at 7:06 am
247 open access thread
There is nothing that I can add that wasn't said in the thread. Some great players. But depressing when you look at a few positions (especially when we now know what 2013 looked like).
It does support my love for 94+ rated players as they are going to be much more consistent success stories (kudos to guys like IMAC and Pyke for proving to be quality exceptions and solid contributors )
There is nothing that I can add that wasn't said in the thread. Some great players. But depressing when you look at a few positions (especially when we now know what 2013 looked like).
It does support my love for 94+ rated players as they are going to be much more consistent success stories (kudos to guys like IMAC and Pyke for proving to be quality exceptions and solid contributors )
3
Posted on 2/28/17 at 7:25 am to meansonny
11 out of 21 rated as full bust. Ouch
Posted on 2/28/17 at 8:30 am to meansonny
I think it's a little ridiculous to rate 3-star players as full busts, and for Dom not to be considered a stud.
Posted on 2/28/17 at 8:56 am to meansonny
quote:
kudos to guys like IMAC and Pyke for proving to be quality exceptions and solid contributors
Could put Gaillard in that same group for becoming a contributor after changing positions.
Posted on 2/28/17 at 10:04 am to Dawgsontop34
quote:
I think it's a little ridiculous to rate 3-star players as full busts,
I didn't really even take star rating into account when reading the guy's writeup, I simply took it as what kind of production we got out of them. Obviously you don't count on 3* guys to be all americans that propel you to a title but there's nothing that says they can't be really good contributors for you. I think it's fair to label someone a full bust if they never even crack the 2-deep at their position regardless of their star rating.
Posted on 2/28/17 at 10:55 am to WG_Dawg
I agree. The writeup is about production. Not meeting/exceeding potential.
The reality is that Tennesee fans think their 3 stars are the best. We think our 3 stars are the best. The reality is that many won't contribute beyond special teams. And only a select few will become solid, reliable starters.
The challenge when we face a top 10 team is how many studs do we have? Are our backups/depth reliable? Our goal is to beat top 10 teams consistently.
This and the 2013 class analysis are good temperature gauges for why we are who we are.
The reality is that Tennesee fans think their 3 stars are the best. We think our 3 stars are the best. The reality is that many won't contribute beyond special teams. And only a select few will become solid, reliable starters.
The challenge when we face a top 10 team is how many studs do we have? Are our backups/depth reliable? Our goal is to beat top 10 teams consistently.
This and the 2013 class analysis are good temperature gauges for why we are who we are.
Posted on 2/28/17 at 10:59 am to BranchDawg
quote:
Could put Gaillard in that same group for becoming a contributor after changing positions
A lot of guys are incomplete. They are still here and can breakout this season.
I remember not liking Sanders Commings aftee his 3rd season. He was racking up tackles because QBs were targeting him successfully. But he was more than solid in his 4th season. That may be the exception more than the norm. But it happens. Some guys don't break out as upper-classmen. It might take their last season before the light comes on (Marcus howard).
Posted on 2/28/17 at 1:18 pm to Dawgsontop34
If joystick is a STUD, then so is Dom.
Posted on 2/28/17 at 2:45 pm to rockchlkjayhku11
It is semantics at that point.
I agree with the OP that IMAC was a stud because he turned games. It was only 1 season while at UGa. But he was a game changer for us in 2016.
Sanders has done more for UGA over his career. But he hasn't had a season where he affects the game as much as what I would consider from a stud (chubb, Michel, IMac, Trenton Thompson).
No one is really wrong, here. Everyone just has a different interpretation of the semantics.
I agree with the OP that IMAC was a stud because he turned games. It was only 1 season while at UGa. But he was a game changer for us in 2016.
Sanders has done more for UGA over his career. But he hasn't had a season where he affects the game as much as what I would consider from a stud (chubb, Michel, IMac, Trenton Thompson).
No one is really wrong, here. Everyone just has a different interpretation of the semantics.
Posted on 3/1/17 at 7:28 am to rockchlkjayhku11
I would have to label Sanders as a solid sec player. He had a great somphore season, but last year wasn't that great for him.
Page 1 of 1
Latest Georgia News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News