Started By
Message
re: Lookback: 2017 recruiting class
Posted on 12/12/19 at 4:40 pm to meansonny
Posted on 12/12/19 at 4:40 pm to meansonny
quote:
This is semantics.
Maybe... but words actually matter in this instance.
If we're going to label guys who played meaningful and quality snaps but happened to get in some trouble as busts (Natrez), I think it's also fair to say that Landers - who has not provided anything substantive in terms of on-field production - as a little worse than "ok for his rating".
I'm not knocking your opinion, as you were pretty clear that you're basing it on snaps/participation... I just think that bust/good/great should probably be more of a reflection of the value or actual production that a recruit provided. In Landers case, as I said, I don't fault him for being a 3* forced into a starting role, I just think it's also fair to say "ok for .857" is maybe a little more credit than he deserves. He's been detrimental on the field to production more than he's been a boost. His only real "production value" has come on the scout team as whether he makes a catch or not is somewhat irrelevant to whether he's able to get in position to beat the defense (causing teachable moments).
We don't have to agree here for both opinions to be valid or based in reality.
I think the issue for Landers (again, not his fault) links back to the freshman year comments from Kirby about real questions about whether they should burn his redshirt. From that moment forward, it put expectations that Kirby believed he could be a *contributor*... especially given that we didn't just need a warm body at the time. Unfortunately, that hasn't panned out. He has been more or less just a warm body... albeit a fast one who can even get in the right position sometimes... but ultimately falls short in too many ways.
2
Posted on 12/12/19 at 5:30 pm to fibonaccisquared
I'm still trying to figure out how Landers saw so much playing time without ever really contributing on the field. Absolutely honest question: does he have more drops than catches?
Is it really as simple as he's a guy who Kirby really liked so they played him?
Is it really as simple as he's a guy who Kirby really liked so they played him?
This post was edited on 12/12/19 at 6:44 pm
Posted on 12/12/19 at 5:40 pm to chillmonster
quote:
does he have more drops than catches?
Fair question. 7 Catches for 80 yards. I have to imagine it's close even if the answer is no.
As to the playing time, I have no idea. I have to imagine it's because he *was* able to separate, which a lot of our receivers struggled with. It's just unfortunate that between Jake's accuracy issues and his dropsies, it didn't result in on-field production.
Posted on 12/12/19 at 6:27 pm to fibonaccisquared
I'd be willing to put $ down that Landers has more drops than catches
Posted on 12/12/19 at 8:27 pm to fibonaccisquared
quote:
we're going to label guys who played meaningful and quality snaps but happened to get in some trouble as busts (Natrez), I think it's also fair to say that Landers - who has not provided anything substantive in terms of on-field production - as a little worse than "ok for his rating".
Lol. Ok for awful means something.
And natrez lost his job to a two star and three star ILB from his same recruiting class.
Did he do good things for UGA?
Yes.
Did he lose his starting job to a 2 star wide receiver recruit? Yes. On top of losing his starting job to a 2 star wide receiver, he also suffered 3 separate suspensions while at UGA. The deck is stacked against Natrez. I've stated my case. No one has talked up his great games or great plays (he has them. I remember them, but I doubt anyone else does because of his shortcomings)
This post was edited on 12/12/19 at 8:28 pm
Page 3 of 3
Latest Georgia News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News