jgtengineer
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 3,066
Pretty much did.I thought at the time that this case helped bring about the change in school policy.
Pretty much did.I thought at the time that this case helped bring about the change in school policy.
He was the next Dwyer. Absolutely punishing b back that opened up every other aspect of the offense. Even when we did not have a strict man advantage/were even/faced blitz fronts we were still running zone dive with him which says a lot about his power. A great weapon in an offense where you don't always have to block everyone. I project him as a good backup in the NFL. Short yardage backs don't have a great life span in the NFL but he will get his shot. On that note, it has always been interesting to me to watch b backs who thrive in the flexbone have trouble in more traditional offenses. I can see how Paul and others have convinced AD's to commit to the triple, just too many advantages. I am starting to want to go back lmaoOh what might have been.
He was the next Dwyer. Absolutely punishing b back that opened up every other aspect of the offense. A great weapon in an offense where you don't have to block everyone. I project him as a good backup in the NFL. Short yardage backs don't have a great life span in the NFL but he will get his shot.
Maybe not the same speed but he certainly had the power which is far more important for a b back. The priority should be getting 4+ yards per carry in a triple option offense, anything past that is icing (which Dwyer brought). Mason always seemed like a b back to me, I'm not sure he had the receiving ability to be a true threat at a back like Searcy and Lynch were. Same with Howard, you have to make the defense respect your passing ability with (technically) four wide recievers otherwise the offense completely collapses. Unless you have an absolute goon squad on the offensive line of course. The triple option relies heavily on four verticals.He didn't quite have the burst dwyer had. The sad thing is that him + marcus marshall would have been a better version of laskey/days. Marshall could absolutely gamebreak things if given a crease and dwyer could punish like crazy. Add in Mason likely as a Big A-back (or potentially mason at A and Howard also at A) You'd have had a crazy backfield with whoever at QB. Searcy and lynch as well around truthfully we'd have had a 2014 level rushing game in 2017 probably especially if Jordan doesn't get injured. Or johnson doesn't suffered his second season ender in 2 years. Marshall could have stayed at A-back as well or certain QB packages.
Speaking of Johnson, looks like he only played in 2 of SDSU's 8 games this season.He didn't quite have the burst dwyer had. The sad thing is that him + marcus marshall would have been a better version of laskey/days. Marshall could absolutely gamebreak things if given a crease and dwyer could punish like crazy. Add in Mason likely as a Big A-back (or potentially mason at A and Howard also at A) You'd have had a crazy backfield with whoever at QB. Searcy and lynch as well around truthfully we'd have had a 2014 level rushing game in 2017 probably especially if Jordan doesn't get injured. Or johnson doesn't suffered his second season ender in 2 years. Marshall could have stayed at A-back as well or certain QB packages.
Speaking of Johnson, looks like he only played in 2 of SDSU's 8 games this season.
We burned Mason's redshirt at reciever, he made 3 catches against UNC one of them a sideline toe tap. They wouldn't be the starter at the same time. It would be another ANt allen type setup where you have ANT on one side and the receiver threat (jones then searcy or lynch in hypothetical 2017)Maybe not the same speed but he certainly had the power which is far more important for a b back. The priority should be getting 4+ yards per carry in a triple option offense, anything past that is icing (which Dwyer brought). Mason always seemed like a b back to me, I'm not sure he had the receiving ability to be a true threat at a back like Searcy and Lynch were. Same with Howard, you have to make the defense respect your passing ability with (technically) four wide recievers otherwise the offense completely collapses. Unless you have an absolute goon squad on the offensive line of course. The triple option relies heavily on four verticals.
I'm sorry what Mason played WR?? Lol took a few years off from being a serious fanWe burned Mason's redshirt at reciever, he made 3 catches against UNC one of them a sideline toe tap. They wouldn't be the starter at the same time. It would be another ANt allen type setup where you have ANT on one side and the receiver threat (jones then searcy or lynch in hypothetical 2017)
A lot of foggy memories on this boardI'm sorry what Mason played WR?? Lol took a few years off from being a serious fan
Short yardage backs don't have a great life span in the NFL but he will get his shot.
I think he’s thinking of Mikell Lands-Davis?I'm sorry what Mason played WR?? Lol took a few years off from being a serious fan
I was damn lol That's what i get for posting that early in the morning.I think he’s thinking of Mikell Lands-Davis?
Smoking marijuana should never be a strikeI'm all for Dedrick and hope he has a great NFL career, but how many strikes does one need - 3, 4, 5, 6? Maybe striking out at Tech might have waked him up to what it takes to succeed.
yeah, that's what he thought too apparently. In an organization or even in society as a whole you don't get to set the policies but you do get the choice to follow them. Or not. If you were our AD maybe Dedrick is still here. Paul too. And the CPJ vs CCG threads would still be alive.Smoking marijuana should never be a strike
Cant tell if that is sarcasm or not. If it's not and you are simply a pothead, it's against the law (in Georgia at least) and against the rules. If one signs on with a company, organization or school where it is against the rules, it is better to not do it.Smoking marijuana should never be a strike
Smoking marijuana should never be a strike