Portal intakes

Techster

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,413
Northeast Stinger said:
Whaaaat !!!!

I need a moment to collect myself.
Click to expand...

Believe it, brother!

There was a LOT of uncertainty and angst among GT fans when NIL and the Portal came around. Lots of GT fans were nervous that NIL and the Portal would favor the factories (and in some cases it has), and GT would fall further behind. The portal has been a net plus for GT. Yes, we've lost some top tier players (Gibbs, Singleton, Kennard, etc.) but we've come out ahead in the end with what we've been able to bring in on a net basis.
 
GTBandit22

GTBandit22

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,343
Techster said:
Click to expand...

From his HS recruiting eval. Hopefully we get the Kennard treatment where Clemson got potential but we get the production. Clemson site says 17 tackles(1.5 for loss) in 325 defensive snaps over 2 years.

PROJECTION​

4-7 RoundDAY 3


Possesses ideal size at 6-foot-5 and 245-pounds, possesses a thick lower half and growth potential to add additional weight to his frame. Displays above average athleticism at the five technique.

Exhibits above average knee bend and hip flexibility in and out of his stance. Flashes a good first step off the line of scrimmage, but has a tendency to be a little late off the ball. Demonstrates good initial foot and body quickness off the line of scrimmage. Wins with speed and quickness in his pass-rush. Will need to continue to develop play strength and ability to play through his frame at the point of attack at the next level. Flashes a high motor and good back side pursuit ability. Appears to be adequate in the run game.

Projects to a five-technique defensive linemen in a base 4-3 defense, already 245-pounds, has the ability to add significant weight to his frame at the next level. Possesses a speed and quickness pass-rush foundation but will need to develop more consistency in his ability to play the run and win with play strength to become a complete defender. Long developing defensive lineman that has the ability to develop into a high level multi-year starter at the Power Five leve
 

MacJacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,409
Our staff has done a great job shoring up most positions. I’d like a few more game-ready LB’s and DT’s. I expect our DT recruits from last year + Garrett to be rotational guys, but we’ll need able bodies as we get deeper in the season.

It looks like we may have a 3rd down NASCAR package with the DE’s we’re bringing in.
 

yeti92

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,220
Techster said:
Believe it, brother!

There was a LOT of uncertainty and angst among GT fans when NIL and the Portal came around. Lots of GT fans were nervous that NIL and the Portal would favor the factories (and in some cases it has), and GT would fall further behind. The portal has been a net plus for GT. Yes, we've lost some top tier players (Gibbs, Singleton, Kennard, etc.) but we've come out ahead in the end with what we've been able to bring in on a net basis.
Click to expand...
Going off the uga game depth chart and looking at the starters/bigger contributors we wouldn't have King, Lane, Janneh, Robinson, Rutledge or Hawes. On defense we wouldn't have had Scott, VDB, Height, Harris, Lightsey, Gibbs, Harvey, and Burrell.

Offensively I think we have benefitted from the portal vs what we lost, primarily from King though I think all those guys listed have done well with making significant contributions.

Defensively, I think we have been a little worse off imo. VDB, Harvey, Burrell, and Height were all solid, but I would trade for Ivey, Kennard, Stone, and Knight and the others we've lost. Those 4 had more sacks (22 vs 18) and forced fumbles (8 vs 7) than our entire defense combined, and 10.5/18 sacks were from guys we got out of HS so would still be with us in this scenario.
 
gtrower

gtrower

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,993
GTBandit22 said:
From his HS recruiting eval. Hopefully we get the Kennard treatment where Clemson got potential but we get the production. Clemson site says 17 tackles(1.5 for loss) in 325 defensive snaps over 2 years.

PROJECTION​

4-7 RoundDAY 3


Possesses ideal size at 6-foot-5 and 245-pounds, possesses a thick lower half and growth potential to add additional weight to his frame. Displays above average athleticism at the five technique.

Exhibits above average knee bend and hip flexibility in and out of his stance. Flashes a good first step off the line of scrimmage, but has a tendency to be a little late off the ball. Demonstrates good initial foot and body quickness off the line of scrimmage. Wins with speed and quickness in his pass-rush. Will need to continue to develop play strength and ability to play through his frame at the point of attack at the next level. Flashes a high motor and good back side pursuit ability. Appears to be adequate in the run game.

Projects to a five-technique defensive linemen in a base 4-3 defense, already 245-pounds, has the ability to add significant weight to his frame at the next level. Possesses a speed and quickness pass-rush foundation but will need to develop more consistency in his ability to play the run and win with play strength to become a complete defender. Long developing defensive lineman that has the ability to develop into a high level multi-year starter at the Power Five leve
Click to expand...

Most of what I’ve seen from Clemson fans is that he has potential as a pass rusher but has been really bad in run defense and gets moved off the ball a lot. Still, he’s played in 20ish games in two years right out of HS. Definitely a take given our DE situation.
 
slugboy

slugboy

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
11,776
gtrower said:
Most of what I’ve seen from Clemson fans is that he has potential as a pass rusher but has been really bad in run defense and gets moved off the ball a lot. Still, he’s played in 20ish games in two years right out of HS. Definitely a take given our DE situation.
Click to expand...
I feel like our current staff has a plan in mind for everyone they offer, even if it's as a rotation player for passing downs
 
kg01

kg01

Get-Bak! Coach
Featured Member
Messages
15,466
Location
Atlanta
Oldgoldandwhite said:
Now that’s a name I haven’t heard in a long time. Great movie.
Click to expand...

stinger78 said:
Saw it just last week. Redford looked good for his age.
Click to expand...

Robert Redford Yes GIF by GritTV
 

mtodd30

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
858
gtrower said:
Most of what I’ve seen from Clemson fans is that he has potential as a pass rusher but has been really bad in run defense and gets moved off the ball a lot. Still, he’s played in 20ish games in two years right out of HS. Definitely a take given our DE situation.
Click to expand...
Put him in on obvious passing situations and we’ve got a winner!
 

croberts

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
880
yeti92 said:
Going off the uga game depth chart and looking at the starters/bigger contributors we wouldn't have King, Lane, Janneh, Robinson, Rutledge or Hawes. On defense we wouldn't have had Scott, VDB, Height, Harris, Lightsey, Gibbs, Harvey, and Burrell.

Offensively I think we have benefitted from the portal vs what we lost, primarily from King though I think all those guys listed have done well with making significant contributions.

Defensively, I think we have been a little worse off imo. VDB, Harvey, Burrell, and Height were all solid, but I would trade for Ivey, Kennard, Stone, and Knight and the others we've lost. Those 4 had more sacks (22 vs 18) and forced fumbles (8 vs 7) than our entire defense combined, and 10.5/18 sacks were from guys we got out of HS so would still be with us in this scenario.
Click to expand...
Actually, K White coming was better than any of the outgoing defenders in my mind. He was so good that he just about single-handedly got a bad Coordinator an extension.
 
Top