Ducks Lead for Sumler

[NCDucks09]

Ducks will always take someone with Sumler's speed. Fact is, Lowe and Huff are probably better players right now, especially Huff, he's basically the next Percy Harvin. It hurts losing Jackson and Gaines, because they were guys with big long bodies who were also play-makers. You know, guys who can crush a DB or hold their own with a safety, while blocking 1st and 2nd downs, but can be a big time clutch possession guy on 3rd and long. Or make a big play over the middle or break a tackle and take it to the house on a wr screen play. Trust me, losing those guys hurts.

Not sure why you'd say that. Sumler is ranked as a four star on both scout and rivals, that's higher than Huff and Lowe. Sumler is faster than both as well. Sumler's offer list is WAY more impressive than Huff and Lowe combined:
http://rivals.yahoo.com/highschool/foot ... mler-78696

To insert that Sumler is worse than Lowe and Huff, IMO, is a horrible assumption. Sumler would be my first choice.

I'll admit Huff has looked good so far in practice, and his highlight video is fun to watch, but he hasn't even played a game yet. And until he does, I'll base my preference off speed, skill, offers, rankings, and other evaluations.

We all know that star rankings mean next to nothing, there is no evidence that a 4 star is better than a 3 star, absolutely no statistical correlative data to back it up. Offer lists and rankings are all speculative as well. Speed can't be faked, we know that Huff has it and so does Sumler, but Huff is built like a tank, so in Oregon's spread option run offense, where the receivers need to be able to block and break tackles off screens to make plays, size, strength, and SPEED are important. Huff and Sumler's speed are comparable, but Huff is a much larger athlete. That's why I like him better right now.

I've watched Lowe play, and he has the skill set and intangibles to make plays, catch the ball, and is pretty darn fast himself. I mean, J.Will. had all the talent in the World, but couldn't catch the ball. J. Holland and Derrick Jones were super fast track guys as well, but neither had the discipline to work hard, stay eligible and had their fair share of dropped balls. Just saying, Sumler is fast and small, and that's all we really know right now.

[JTinKC]

If anything Sulmer looks like he could be a good CB. Speed with that leaping ability would translate well fro coverage.

[glazeduck]

Ducks will always take someone with Sumler's speed. Fact is, Lowe and Huff are probably better players right now, especially Huff, he's basically the next Percy Harvin. It hurts losing Jackson and Gaines, because they were guys with big long bodies who were also play-makers. You know, guys who can crush a DB or hold their own with a safety, while blocking 1st and 2nd downs, but can be a big time clutch possession guy on 3rd and long. Or make a big play over the middle or break a tackle and take it to the house on a wr screen play. Trust me, losing those guys hurts.

Not sure why you'd say that. Sumler is ranked as a four star on both scout and rivals, that's higher than Huff and Lowe. Sumler is faster than both as well. Sumler's offer list is WAY more impressive than Huff and Lowe combined:
http://rivals.yahoo.com/highschool/foot ... mler-78696

To insert that Sumler is worse than Lowe and Huff, IMO, is a horrible assumption. Sumler would be my first choice.

I'll admit Huff has looked good so far in practice, and his highlight video is fun to watch, but he hasn't even played a game yet. And until he does, I'll base my preference off speed, skill, offers, rankings, and other evaluations.

We all know that star rankings mean next to nothing, there is no evidence that a 4 star is better than a 3 star, absolutely no statistical correlative data to back it up. Offer lists and rankings are all speculative as well. Speed can't be faked, we know that Huff has it and so does Sumler, but Huff is built like a tank, so in Oregon's spread option run offense, where the receivers need to be able to block and break tackles off screens to make plays, size, strength, and SPEED are important. Huff and Sumler's speed are comparable, but Huff is a much larger athlete. That's why I like him better right now.

I've watched Lowe play, and he has the skill set and intangibles to make plays, catch the ball, and is pretty darn fast himself. I mean, J.Will. had all the talent in the World, but couldn't catch the ball. J. Holland and Derrick Jones were super fast track guys as well, but neither had the discipline to work hard, stay eligible and had their fair share of dropped balls. Just saying, Sumler is fast and small, and that's all we really know right now.

Sumler has run verified 4.2 40's, Huff, if I recall was around 4.4. 4.4's fast, but not comparable to 4.2. 4.2 is olympic sprinter type speed, so in terms of speed, yeah Huff's fast, but if he's really upwards of 200 I can't imagine he's still running 4.4s.

Beyond that I think it's a little silly to compare the two. Huff played QB and RB in high school and is being looked at for the TZR position. Yeah he's bigger now which is nice, and if he can learn how to run routes properly and shows he has good hands then he can probably bump outside eventually, but by all accounts that I've read, Sumler, right now, is being recruited strictly as a WR, and watching his highlite film reveals that this kid knows how to play the position right now. Certainly EVERY incoming freshman is raw to an extent, but it shouldn't be overlooked that Huff is transitioning to a new position.

Apples to oranges if you ask me...

[neezy3]

Sumler's video really impressed me with his ability to go up and make plays on jump balls. He is a terrific athlete no doubt about it.

[greenyellow]

Sumler is a good athlete who would be an excellent fit for Kelly's offense. Chip's offense doesn't really depend on the size of the skill players so Sumler's size wouldn't matter. Sumler's speed is what Chip is after.

[UofO8]

If anything Sulmer looks like he could be a good CB. Speed with that leaping ability would translate well fro coverage.

HEEEEELLL NO. Sumler would be way to much of a threat on offense to stick him at CB.

[greenyellow]

If anything Sulmer looks like he could be a good CB. Speed with that leaping ability would translate well fro coverage.

HEEEEELLL NO. Sumler would be way to much of a threat on offense to stick him at CB.

We have way too much depth at CB and not enough depth at WR to even mention moving him to CB.

[JTinKC]

We have way too much depth at CB and not enough depth at WR to even mention moving him to CB.

I agree with you for the most part but I would be curious to know what his blocking ability is. Too be fully honest I'm not as excited about our corners as I once was.

[Boom]

We have way too much depth at CB and not enough depth at WR to even mention moving him to CB.

I agree with you for the most part but I would be curious to know what his blocking ability is. Too be fully honest I'm not as excited about our corners as I once was.

His size is much more of a liability at corner than at WR.....

[duckfan96]

I am not sure of Steve Largents size...but I know he wasnt huge and that dude used to lay some people out with blocks. Not comparing just saying. Technique probably has a lot to do with it.

[greenyellow]

We have way too much depth at CB and not enough depth at WR to even mention moving him to CB.

I agree with you for the most part but I would be curious to know what his blocking ability is. Too be fully honest I'm not as excited about our corners as I once was.

As a slot, his blocking, while important, is not as key to the running game as are the guys on the outside, like Maehl and Davis. The slots tend to be doing crackback blocks on LBs, with the help of TEs and OL.

[glazeduck]

Not to be THAT GUY (normally I can't STAND that guy), but this "can Sumler block" discussion has already happened in another thread.

Literally, the same exact conversation...

[JTinKC]

Literally, the same exact conversation...

Found it, but it doesn't really shed light on his skill in this area. Is it just me or when comparing Seastrunks sophmore highlights to that of Sumlers, does Seastrunk look much faster to anyone else? I don't know if its just the competition or how the video was taken (angle, etc..),but Seastrunk just blows by people while this guy being fast doesn't look as fast on film.

[glazeduck]

Literally, the same exact conversation...

Found it, but it doesn't really shed light on his skill in this area. Is it just me or when comparing Seastrunks sophmore highlights to that of Sumlers, does Seastrunk look much faster to anyone else? I don't know if its just the competition or how the video was taken (angle, etc..),but Seastrunk just blows by people while this guy being fast doesn't look as fast on film.

Unless one of us on here was somehow Sumler's high school coach, I don't think any of us could say with any certainty what his skill is in regards to blocking. As you saw in the other thread (again, I know about it because I was the one that took it on the blocking tangent) it's pure speculation on our part to think that a bigger wr would be a better blocker, obviously Hines Ward proves that's not always the case, but until he gets here and does or does not lay out a few LBs, we won't know.

As to his and Strunk's highlite videos, I'll say that I've seen what you're seeing, but it's hard to really compare those for a myriad of reasons. Strunk and Sumler playing different positions will affect how fast they look/are on tape, remember kids run the 40 in shorts and in a straight line, which never happens in games. Also, Strunk playing rb and Sum at wr could have an effect too. Strunk gets a running start whereas Sum can get jammed right at the line, leading to a delay in his explosiveness. The quality, speed, and angle of pursuit of the opponents in the films, when speaking from a strictly observational perspective could have an effect on how fast each "look" too (although you could, in some instances, and with WAAAY more math than I'm qualified to perform, measure their speed on film), finally, the quality of the film could even come into play in deciding which looks faster. Watch a film with a low fps (frames per second) and one with a high fps and the high one will certainly look faster. Food for thought.

Again, until we get these kids in pads, all we can REALLY compare is their timed 40's run on fast tracks in shorts.

[thegreenstain]

I agree with you for the most part but I would be curious to know what his blocking ability is. Too be fully honest I'm not as excited about our corners as I once was.

Why? Has something happened recently that I am not aware of?