Page 1 of 1
Why are we taking four OLBs in this class?
Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:17 pm
by vagusnerve
Garrick, Cassell, Coleman and Hardrick.
They're all about 6.1 and 210 lbs.
They're all fast, quick guys.
Seems strange that we'd take four guys who are pretty much mirror images of each other physically in the same class.
Any speculation about the reason for this?
Re: Why are we taking four OLBs in this class?
Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:42 pm
by AugustDuck
vagusnerve wrote:Garrick, Cassell, Coleman and Hardrick.
They're all about 6.1 and 210 lbs.
They're all fast, quick guys.
Seems strange that we'd take four guys who are pretty much mirror images of each other physically in the same class.
Any speculation about the reason for this?
and it would have been 5 with Wilson.
Re: Why are we taking four OLBs in this class?
Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:43 pm
by Phalanx
Coleman and Garrick are listed as strong safeties on Scout if that helps. You're right- they are all basically the same size, but given that Eddie Pleasant can switch from OLB to SS, it seems like the position has some overlap in the Duck scheme.
Either this, or we are planning to trade two of them for a DT.

Re: Why are we taking four OLBs in this class?
Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:51 pm
by woundedknees
Oregon is hiring Pete Carroll's trainer from the old USC crew, and a strict regimen of undetectable substance will be administered, in order to allow these young men to become DT material.
Re: Why are we taking four OLBs in this class?
Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:54 pm
by greenyellow
Phalanx wrote:Coleman and Garrick are listed as strong safeties on Scout if that helps. You're right- they are all basically the same size, but given that Eddie Pleasant can switch from OLB to SS, it seems like the position has some overlap in the Duck scheme.
Either this, or we are planning to trade two of them for a DT.

That seems to be the plan with those two. The coaches are developing them into OLBs but one could turn into a DB if they don't progress well as an OLB. Coleman would be a beast as a safety but his build is going to allow him to play OLB.
Re: Why are we taking four OLBs in this class?
Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:58 pm
by buckmarkduck
Kenny Rowe is 6'2 235, and right now Coleman is 6'2 205. His coach says he could easily get to 230-240 and not lose speed, maybe the coaches plan on one of these guys moving to DE hybrid spot. Plus I've heard the coaches where concerned about our depth at LB especially after next year, since we like to play so many guys on D during the game.
Re: Why are we taking four OLBs in this class?
Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 8:02 pm
by maxduck
buckmarkduck wrote:Kenny Rowe is 6'2 235, and right now Coleman is 6'2 205. His coach says he could easily get to 230-240 and not lose speed, maybe the coaches plan on one of these guys moving to DE hybrid spot. Plus I've heard the coaches where concerned about our depth at LB especially after next year, since we like to play so many guys on D during the game.
It pays dividends on special teams as well.
Re: Why are we taking four OLBs in this class?
Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 8:03 pm
by Phalanx
buckmarkduck wrote:Kenny Rowe is 6'2 235, and right now Coleman is 6'2 205. His coach says he could easily get to 230-240 and not lose speed, maybe the coaches plan on one of these guys moving to DE hybrid spot. Plus I've heard the coaches where concerned about our depth at LB especially after next year, since we like to play so many guys on D during the game.
I would so rather see Lyerla in that Kenny Rowe role. He would be amazing.
Re: Why are we taking four OLBs in this class?
Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 8:06 pm
by vagusnerve
a guy who's 6.2 230 and fast is a pretty good type of guy to have around.
while all these guys are about the same physically right now, I bet in two or three years we see some differences on how they each put on weight and get faster.
Re: Why are we taking four OLBs in this class?
Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 8:15 pm
by Juice
whoever we put at the hybrid position needs to be able to cover. love deathrowe, and all that he did for us, but man his coverage... that was tough to watch lol
Re: Why are we taking four OLBs in this class?
Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 8:38 pm
by GrandpaDuck
Hardrick played inside linebacker and is 6'3". Supposedly up to 215, but we'll see when he gets here.
Re: Why are we taking four OLBs in this class?
Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 8:54 pm
by greenyellow
GrandpaDuck wrote:Hardrick played inside linebacker and is 6'3". Supposedly up to 215, but we'll see when he gets here.
He can get away with that in HS, but in college, he'll put on some weight once he reaches a college training program. Just look at Casey Matthews. He arrived at 220 but is now easily over 240.
Re: Why are we taking four OLBs in this class?
Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 9:40 pm
by Boom
greenyellow wrote:GrandpaDuck wrote:Hardrick played inside linebacker and is 6'3". Supposedly up to 215, but we'll see when he gets here.
He can get away with that in HS, but in college, he'll put on some weight once he reaches a college training program. Just look at Casey Matthews. He arrived at 220 but is now easily over 240.
Yes
And our program is reaching a point were it's extremely hard for kids to see the field early. I'm going to guess that at least 2 of these guys don't play until their redshirt junior year.
Re: Why are we taking four OLBs in this class?
Posted: Sun Jan 30, 2011 5:52 pm
by ddigglerjr
And our program is reaching a point were it's extremely hard for kids to see the field early.
I don't know if that's really true. Yes, we are deep, but the depth is utilized by playing 25+ guys on defense. But, I'm sure you're right about some not seeing the field until their Junior seasons. Some kids take longer to develop.