New Receiving Target

Moderators: greenyellow, UOducksTK1

wlduck
Sophomore
Posts: 1722
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 3:19 pm

Re: New Receiving Target

Post by wlduck »

MFRDuckFan wrote:
woundedknees wrote:Good to know... Frost seems to be pretty effective.
Frost is VERY effective for me.........oh.......sorry.........didn't mean to let that slip! :lol: :lol:

Very nice MFR.
vagusnerve
Freshman
Posts: 1383
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:56 pm

Re: New Receiving Target

Post by vagusnerve »

hines wrote:
ppilot wrote:I think this is a sign that the staff aren't counting on Lee or Kelly
nope.
is that "nope" affirmative or negative?

Do we really need another WR in this class if it's not someone like Lee?

Dude, just save the remaining spots for the DLine and major talent.... if we have a couple left over more for next year.
User avatar
MFRDuckFan
Senior
Posts: 4829
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:52 pm
Location: Medford

Re: New Receiving Target

Post by MFRDuckFan »

wlduck wrote:
MFRDuckFan wrote:
woundedknees wrote:Good to know... Frost seems to be pretty effective.
Frost is VERY effective for me.........oh.......sorry.........didn't mean to let that slip! :lol: :lol:

Very nice MFR.
I was raised by wolves, what can I say!! :twisted:
woundedknees
All-American
Posts: 12826
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:06 pm

Re: New Receiving Target

Post by woundedknees »

Be glad she's not a Cougar(fan)...
Autzen Stadium... Where great teams go to die...Hard!

Image
User avatar
greenyellow
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 39359
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 6:54 pm
Location: Eugene, OR

Re: New Receiving Target

Post by greenyellow »

The coaches won't ever stop recruiting until the LOIs are signed since these kids can change so fast and leave the school hanging if they don't have back-up plans. In this case with Caesar, it does sound that he's now a top target and I wonder if it has to do with Wilson's scholarship being withdrawn now.
Image
User avatar
UOducksTK1
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 40708
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 11:28 pm
GM: Boston Celtics GM
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: New Receiving Target

Post by UOducksTK1 »

vagusnerve wrote:
hines wrote:
ppilot wrote:I think this is a sign that the staff aren't counting on Lee or Kelly
nope.
is that "nope" affirmative or negative?

Do we really need another WR in this class if it's not someone like Lee?

Dude, just save the remaining spots for the DLine and major talent.... if we have a couple left over more for next year.
I think nope as in if we get BJ, he believes Caesar is still in play.

Do Not Fear. Isaiah 41:13
User avatar
greenyellow
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 39359
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 6:54 pm
Location: Eugene, OR

Re: New Receiving Target

Post by greenyellow »

UOducksTK1 wrote:
vagusnerve wrote:
hines wrote:
ppilot wrote:I think this is a sign that the staff aren't counting on Lee or Kelly
nope.
is that "nope" affirmative or negative?

Do we really need another WR in this class if it's not someone like Lee?

Dude, just save the remaining spots for the DLine and major talent.... if we have a couple left over more for next year.
I think nope as in if we get BJ, he believes Caesar is still in play.
I think that may be it. The coaches may want to get another couple WRs in this class if they can just so they have some players they could possibly redshirt. The freshman class, as of now, next year will have Dungy, Lowe, Sumler, and Blackmon so I could see them possibly getting some more WRs that they hope to develop and use in the future.
Image
vagusnerve
Freshman
Posts: 1383
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:56 pm

Re: New Receiving Target

Post by vagusnerve »

But how many WRs do we actually need this year?

My god, we had at least Lowe and Dungy last year who redshirted.

Now we may bring in five more? I know we need some bodies at the position but why overkill it? Let's just go out and get two more top flight WRs next year?
User avatar
ncduck
Senior
Posts: 2189
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 7:14 am
Location: Rancho Palos Verdes, CA

Re: New Receiving Target

Post by ncduck »

Is it overkill? We have like three on the field all the time, that means we need six on the two deep and another handful backing it up on the scout team.

Also, it's really tough to know what the coaches have planned for each player.
vagusnerve
Freshman
Posts: 1383
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:56 pm

Re: New Receiving Target

Post by vagusnerve »

ncduck wrote:Is it overkill? We have like three on the field all the time, that means we need six on the two deep and another handful backing it up on the scout team.

Also, it's really tough to know what the coaches have planned for each player.
For sure, but this isn't in a vacuum... we've got a really small class next year if we fully book this one. really small. And by all accounts next year's recruiting will be better than this years.... sooooooo.......
bellsduck
Senior
Posts: 3857
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:40 am
GM: Utah Jazz

Re: New Receiving Target

Post by bellsduck »

vagusnerve wrote:
ncduck wrote:Is it overkill? We have like three on the field all the time, that means we need six on the two deep and another handful backing it up on the scout team.

Also, it's really tough to know what the coaches have planned for each player.
For sure, but this isn't in a vacuum... we've got a really small class next year if we fully book this one. really small. And by all accounts next year's recruiting will be better than this years.... sooooooo.......
This is what I don't understand. Why the rush to fill this year's class to the max, if the experts say that next year and the year after is when we strike gold.
AugustDuck
Three Star Recruit
Posts: 432
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2010 7:57 am

Re: New Receiving Target

Post by AugustDuck »

bellsduck wrote:
vagusnerve wrote:
ncduck wrote:Is it overkill? We have like three on the field all the time, that means we need six on the two deep and another handful backing it up on the scout team.

Also, it's really tough to know what the coaches have planned for each player.
For sure, but this isn't in a vacuum... we've got a really small class next year if we fully book this one. really small. And by all accounts next year's recruiting will be better than this years.... sooooooo.......
This is what I don't understand. Why the rush to fill this year's class to the max, if the experts say that next year and the year after is when we strike gold.
It is hard to say what the coaches might know. Perhaps they are aware that 10 players are planning on transferring out of the program. If something like that were happening, they would want to fill this class up.

I have no inside information as to whether any player will transfer.
MacDuck
Three Star Recruit
Posts: 489
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:20 am

Re: New Receiving Target

Post by MacDuck »

uostudent wrote:
ppilot wrote:I think this is a sign that the staff aren't counting on Lee or Kelly
Kelley is visiting this weekend. Lee is probably headed to USC though.

What's odd is that the coaching staff flat out dropped Hakeem Flowers and Anthony Denham.

Caesar would be a nice addition. Hopefully they can get him out here for a visit.
When was the staff ever that serious about Flowers & Denham? Flowers isn't coveted by very many schools and right now he may be down to only Michigan. Sure he had an offer, but they canceled his trip and haven't shown much interest since. As for Denham, it's very dubious if he ever had an unconditional offer from us. Once we secured the 1 JC we truly wanted in Vaughn they likely told Denham adios. The fact that they're still looking at Cesar & Kelley tells me that Flowers & Denham are both serious back up plans and have been so for a long time.
sx1080
Three Star Recruit
Posts: 481
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 11:56 am

Re: New Receiving Target

Post by sx1080 »

vagusnerve wrote:
ncduck wrote:Is it overkill? We have like three on the field all the time, that means we need six on the two deep and another handful backing it up on the scout team.

Also, it's really tough to know what the coaches have planned for each player.
For sure, but this isn't in a vacuum... we've got a really small class next year if we fully book this one. really small. And by all accounts next year's recruiting will be better than this years.... sooooooo.......

scollies are for one yr only. a player can be dropped at the end of each school yr.
bellsduck
Senior
Posts: 3857
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 12:40 am
GM: Utah Jazz

Re: New Receiving Target

Post by bellsduck »

sx1080 wrote:
vagusnerve wrote:
ncduck wrote:Is it overkill? We have like three on the field all the time, that means we need six on the two deep and another handful backing it up on the scout team.

Also, it's really tough to know what the coaches have planned for each player.
For sure, but this isn't in a vacuum... we've got a really small class next year if we fully book this one. really small. And by all accounts next year's recruiting will be better than this years.... sooooooo.......

scollies are for one yr only. a player can be dropped at the end of each school yr.
I don't think that's a practice any school wants to be known for.
Post Reply